Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12/5/1980FRIDAY, DECEMBER 5, 1980 THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, MET IN SPECIAL SESSION AT THE CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 1053 20TH PLACE, VERO BEACH, FLORIDA, ON FRIDAY, DECEMBER 5, 1980, AT 4:30 O'CLOCK P.M. PRESENT WERE PATRICK B. LYONS, CHAIRMAN; DICK BIRD; ALFRED GROVER FLETCHER; AND DON C. SCURLOCK, JR. ABSENT WAS WILLIAM C. WODTKE, JR., VICE CHAIRMAN, DUE TO A BUSINESS APPOINT- MENT. ALSO PRESENT WERE NEIL A. NELSON, COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR; ANTHONY SOVIERO, ASSISTANT COUNTY ATTORNEY; JEFFREY K. BARTON, FINANCE DIRECTOR; AND VIRGINIA HARGREAVES, DEPUTY CLERK. CHAIRMAN LYONS CALLED THE MEETING TO ORDER AND ANNOUNCED THAT IT WAS CALLED FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONSIDERING CHANGE PROPOSALS AND CHANGE ORDERS RELATIVE TO THE RENOVATION OF THE COURTHOUSE AND THE ADMINISTRATION BUILDING. CONSTRUCTION PROJECT REPRESENTATIVE HERCULES KONTOULAS REVIEWED CHANGE PROPOSAL #1 (9364-1) AND EXPLAINED THAT RATHER THAN CANCELING THE ORIGINAL FIGURE OF $36,596 FOR THE FINISHING OF THE INTERIOR OF THE COURTHOUSE ANNEX, THIS WOULD EXTEND THE TIME FOR COMPLETION OF THE ANNEX TO A LATER DATE THAN THE DUE COMPLETION DATE OF THE ORIGINAL CONTRACT, THIS EXTENSION OF TIME WOULD START 18 DAYS AFTER THE COMPLETION DATE OF THE ADMINISTRATION BUILDING (JULY X81) AND EXTEND TO OCTOBER 30, 1981, WHICH IS APPROXIMATELY A THREE MONTH EXTENSION OF THAT CONTRACT. CHANGE PROPOSAL #12 IS AN ALTERNATIVE PROPOSAL, WHICH WOULD DELETE THE WORK TO BE DONE IN THE COURTHOUSE ANNEX INTERIOR AND ALLOW CREDIT FOR THE DELETION AS FOLLOWS: CHANGE PROPOSAL NO. 12 - SUIS-IARY Sub -Contractor° Costs t'.etal Studs & Drywall $ 3,460.00 Electrical 7,907.00 Painting 4,257.00 Carpeting (Installation Only) 1,200.00 Aluminum Storefront 400.00 General Contractor Direct Costs Total r1mount Proposed (Deductive) DEC 51980 $11,224.00 4,000.00 $21,2214.00 apot - 45 PAGE 4t16 DEC 51980 BooK 45 FA' U407 MR. KONTOULAS FAVORED ACCEPTING THE EXTENSION OF THE CONTRACT RATHER THAN ACCEPTING THE CREDIT AND THEN HAVING TO RENEGO- TIATE AT A LATER DATE. CHAIRMAN LYONS COMMENTED THAT THE EXTENSION OF TIME WOULD GIVE THE PEOPLE IN THE ANNEX 18 DAYS TO MOVE OUT, AND MR. KONTOULAS AGREED, NOTING THAT THE PROPERTY APPRAISER AND THE TAX COLLECTOR CANNOT MOVE OUT UNTIL THE ADMINISTRATION BUILDING IS COMPLETED; S0, THIS IS ALL BASED ON THE COMPLETION DATE OF THAT BUILDING. CHAIRMAN LYONS REQUESTED THAT MR. KONTOULAS EXPLAIN ABOUT THE CREDIT AND HOW WE WOULD DEAL WITH THE FACT THAT THE WAY THE CONTRACT WAS BID CALLS FOR SOME OF THE LIGHTS IN THE ANNEX TO BE USED TO COMPLETE THE COURTHOUSE, EVEN THOUGH THESE LIGHTS ARE PRES- ENTLY BEING USED IN THE ANNEX. MR. KONTOULAS EXPLAINED THAT WHAT THE CONTRACTOR HAS DONE IN THE CREDIT IS LIST HIS SUB -CONTRACTING COST; HE INFORMED THE BOARD THAT THE CONTRACTOR ALREADY HAS BOUGHT THE CARPETING AND ALUMINUM STOREFRONT, WHICH IS FOR THE DOOR ON THE SECOND FLOOR OF THE ANNEX LEADING TO THE NEW CAUSEWAY. IN REGARD TO THE LIGHTS, MR. KONTOULAS CONTINUED THAT APPROXIMATELY 46 LIGHTING FIXTURES FROM THE ANNEX ARE TO BE REHUNG AND REUSED IN PORTIONS OF THE COURTHOUSE. HE NOTED THAT THESE LIGHTS ARE ARRANGED IN ROWS, AND THEY WOULD TAKE SOME OUT OF EACH ROW SO THAT IT WOULD BE ONLY A LITTLE DARKER. ADMINISTRATOR NELSON COMMENTED THAT THEY HAVE DONE EVERY- THING POSSIBLE NOT TO INTERRUPT THE PEOPLE OVER IN THE ANNEX. HE STATED THAT THE CLERK'S PEOPLE HAVE COOPERATED MAGNIFICENTLY DURING THE ON-GOING RENOVATIONS IN THE COURTHOUSE, AND WE NOW WILL NEED SOME COOPERATION FROM THE PEOPLE IN THE ANNEX. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER FLETCHER, SECONDED BY COMMIS- SIONER BIRD, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY AUTHORIZED THE CONSTRUCTION PROJECT REPRESENTATIVE TO REQUEST THE CONTRACTOR TO WRITE A CHANGE ORDER APPROVING CHANGE PROPOSAL #1 (9364-1) AND DELETING CHANGE PROPOSAL #12 RE THE COURTHOUSE AND AUTHORIZED THE SIGNATURE OF THE CHAIRMAN. 2 z CHA•NGL U (X7NER PROPOSAL ® ARCHITECT fJ ONTRACTOR FIELD C1 OTHER . PROJECT: County Courthouse: Bu l l d l n}; CONTRACTOR: Reinhold Construction, Inc. ADDRESS: P. U. Box 666 - Cocoa, Florida 32922 ATTENTION: Mr. Paul A. Reinhold to CHANGE PROPOSAL #9364-1 DATE --,— Please submit yniir "extra", "credit". or "no -chance" proposal for the proposed change(s) described herein. Proposal shall be in itemized cost breakdown form with sub -contractor's itemized proposal(s) attached. Proposals shall include all work related and incidental to the change and necessary to properly complete the work. The work shall be in accordance with the requirements of the contract docirnents unless otherwise specified or indicated herein. Proposals and all exhibits shall be referenced with this CPidentification. This is not an order to proceed with this change. If your proposal is accepted, a change order will be issued. SECTION 00210 CONTRACT FORM _ Subsection 2.02. Change the number of Calendar Days from "275" to 0515". ! This should be accomplished as follows: N.T.P. May 5, 1980 4 I Original Scheduled Completion Date A _ February��l.�j New scheduled Cam pletion Date for the County Courthouse Building (without Annex Building Interiors) February 3, 1981 New N.T.P. For Annex Building Interiors August 1, 1981 -� New Scheduled Completion Date for the Annex Building October -I",1981_ Postpone all work relating to renovations inside the Annex Building portion of the County Courthouse Building to a starting date of August 1, 1981 (18 days after Campletion of County Administration Building project (#9363) and a canpletion date of October 1, 1981. All exterior work on the Annex building will be completed during the original time frame for the County Courthouse Building. Electric service to the Annex must also be provided during the construction. F e> PROJECT NO.: 9364 DEC 51980 TP, c . . > I,- � r� F Ct . - 9 . Connell Metcalf & Eddy BOOR 45 PACE 448 DEC 51980 BOOK 45 PAGE 409 CHAIRMAN LYONS INFORMED THE BOARD THAT MR. KONTOULAS IS KEEPING A RUNNING RECORD OF ALL THE ITEMS INVOLVED IN THE CHANGE PROPOSALS AND ASSESSING WHOMEVER HE FEELS, IN HIS JUDGMENT, IS AT FAULT FOR THE PARTICULAR ITEM SO THAT WHEN WE GET DOWN TO THE END OF THE ROAD, WE WILL AT LEAST HAVE A RUNNING RECORD OF OMISSIONS AND ERRORS AND OUR REPRESENTATIVE'S ASSESSMENT OF WHO IS RESPONSIBLE. COMMISSIONER SUCRLOCK FELT IT WOULD BE_APPROPRIATE TO IN- STRUCT OUR LEGAL STAFF TO DRAW A LETTER INDICATING THAT ACCEPTANCE OF A CHANGE ORDER DOES NOT MEAN THAT EVERYTHING IS NECESSARILY RIGHT OR WRONG; IN OTHER WORDS, RESERVING OUR RIGHTS. ADMINISTRATOR NELSON FELT THIS IS ALREADY IN THE CONTRACT DOCUMENT COMMISSIONER BIRD ASKED IF THERE WAS NOT SOME WAY TO MAKE AN ASSESSMENT OF HOW MUCH ADDITIONAL TIME ACTUALLY WAS INVOLVED IN EACH CHANGE ORDER WHEN IT IS COMPLETED, AND THEN DOCUMENT IT SO WE DON'T.GET A LOT OF SURPRISES AT THE END OF THE CONTRACT. MR. KONTOULAS EXPLAINED THAT HE CANNOT WATCH EVERY ELECTRI- CIAN AND EVERY WORKMAN, BUT REPORTED THAT ON THE DRYWALL INSTALLATION FOR CHANGE ORDER #4, FOR EXAMPLE, HE HAS DOCUMENTED 6 DAYS OF PUTTING UP THE FURRING STRIPS, WITH A NOTE THAT ONE DAY WAS LOST BY PUTTING UP THE WRONG MATERIAL, MAKING IT 5 DAYS. TODAY THEY HAVE STARTED DRYWALLING OVER THE FURRING STRIPS, AND THIS IS HOW HE DOCUMENTS THESE THINGS. CONSIDERABLE DISCUSSION ENSUED ABOUT HOW THE TIME ACTUALLY INVOLVED IN EACH CHANGE ORDER CAN BE DOCUMENTED SO WE DON'T HAVE TO WAIT UNTIL .JULY TO FIND OUT HOW MANY ADDITIONAL DAYS WE WILL BE CHARGED FOR. COMMISSIONER FLETCHER FELT THE QUESTION COMMISSIONER BIRD IS TRYING TO GET CLEAR IS WHETHER THE DATE OF INITIATION OF A CHANGE ORDER AND THE DATE OF COMPLETION OF THIS CHANGE ORDER IS BEING DOCUMENTED, CHAIRMAN LYONS DID NOT BELIEVE YOU CAN ACCURATELY PIN THIS DOWN BECAUSE THERE IS WORK WITHIN WORK AND VARIOUS THINGS ARE GOING ON AT ALL TIMES; IT IS THE THINGS THAT GET INTO THE CRITICAL PATH THAT CAUSE THE DELAY.• =4 MR, REINHOLD STATED THAT IF THE JOB RUNS PAST THE COMPLE- TION DATE, THEY HAVE A DOCUMENTED RECORD OF THE ITEMS, EACH CHANGE HAS A TIME ON IT, AND IT IS EVALUATED AND DISCUSSED WITH THE ARCHI- TECT AND MR, KONTOULAS, COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK STATED THAT HE WOULD LIKE TO BE ABLE TO DOCUMENT IN ORDER TO SEE HOW MUCH THESE VARIOUS CHANGES COST US, ATTORNEY SOVIERO AGREED AND FELT WE MUST KEEP A RUNNING RECORD AND THAT IN ORDER FOR THE CONTRACTOR TO BE COMPENSATED, IT WOULD HAVE TO BE FOR ITEMS DONE AT THE OWNER °S REQUEST, HE ALSO AGREED THAT WE DO NOT WANT TO WAIVE ANY RIGHTS AND FELT A TABULATION SHOULD BE KEPT ON SITE AS TO WHAT IS THE CAUSE OF EACH CHANGE ORDER, IN FURTHER DISCUSSION, IT WAS GENERALLY AGREED THAT WE HAVE NOT JEOPARDIZED OR WAIVED ANY RIGHTS, BUT THAT IT WOULD MAKE MATTERS CLEARER IF WE HAD A LETTER RESERVING OUR RIGHTS, IT WAS ALSO AGREED THAT WHEN A CHANGE ORDER COMES TO THE. COMMISSION, IT WOULD BE HELPFUL IF A HISTORY OF WHO INITIATED IT AND WHY WERE INCLUDED, MR, KONTOULAS COMMENTED THAT IF SOMETHING IS THE ARCHITECTS FAULT, HE DOUBTED THEY WOULD WRITE IT ON THE CHANGE ORDER, BUT STATED HE WOULD BE GLAD TO POINT IT OUT IF IT WERE THEIR FAULT, MR, KONTOULAS NEXT WENT ON TO DISCUSS CHANGE ORDER #5 FOR THE COURTHOUSE WHICH COVERS THE FOLLOWING ITEMS: 0 •�1 BOOK 45 PA;E 410 DEC 51980 9001( 45 PACE 411 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY COUNTY COURTHOUSE CO #5 I tom 1 Include the cost of. Item tin. 1 - CO 93, $ 250.00 which was not included in the sum total of CO #3. Item 2 Wrap the existing air conditioning duct 1,925.00 on the north portion of thr courthouse roof with DIM aluminum m-mhr:-jne. This is a first line cost item. Item 3 Provide hardware for existing doors -at 16,985.94 the Courthouse. This is a first line cast item, the cost of which could not he determined at th#,� t:imr� of bid,jing. Item 4 CP -5 Supplement - Dry wa1.1 was excluded from 1,180.35 CP -5 until requirements COUld be determined. Item 5 CP -13 - Additional work r.�yuired to provide 13,694.75 suitable interior finishes to areas as noted in this Change Proposal. Item 6 CP -17 - Lower ceiling in Room 109 and provide 1,117.60 duct and ceiling diffusers. Item 7 CP -19 - Provide exhaust fan and duct in.first 1•,151.25 floor women'.; toilet at owner's request. Item 8 CP -20 - Modify jury box at owner's request. 1.,789.10 Item 9 CP -23 - Provide hardware for aluminum doors 3,073.33 per specifications and not in hardware Schep+ule. `POTAI. $41,168.32 MR. KONTOULAS REPORTED THAT HE HAS CHECKED ITEM I AND VERIFIED THAT IT WAS NOT INCLUDED IN CHANGE ORDER #3. ITEM 2 - MR, KONTOULAS EXPLAINED THAT THE SPECIFIED ROOFING COULD NOT BE USED BECAUSE OF THE WATER UNDERNEATH THE ROOFING ON THE NORTH END OF THE COURTHOUSE, AND THE DIFFERENCE FOR THE ROOFING WAS INADVERTENTLY LEFT OFF THE CHANGE ORDER BY THE ARCHITECT. THE ACCUMU- LATION OF WATER IS BEING CAUSED BY THE OLD INSULATION WRAPPED AROUND THE EXISTING DUCT, AND MR. KONTOULAS FELT IT IS WORTH $1,925 TO CURE THIS SITUATION, MR. KONTOULAS CONTINUED THAT THE HARDWARE FOR THE EXISTING DOORS AS CALLED FOR IN ITEM 3 IS A NECESSITY. [:1 COMMISSIONER BIRD ASKED IF THIS WAS NOT INCLUDED IN THE ORIGINAL BID, AND MR. KONTOULAS INFORMED THE BOARD THAT THE HARDWARE WAS A VERY SORE POINT WITH HIM; HE HAD TOLD THE ARCHITECTS THAT THE ALLOWANCE FOR HARDWARE WAS INSUFFICIENT AND UNACCEPTABLE AND WAS TOLD QUITE RUDELY THAT THEY WERE THE PROFESSIONALS AND HE WASNIT. ITEM 4 - IN THE RELOCATION OF THE TWO TOILET ROOMS IN THE SOUTH END OF THE JUDGES' AREA, THERE WAS ADDITIONAL WORK BECAUSE OF THE EXISTING PLUMBING AND THE NEW FURRING, AND THE MATERIAL AND DRYWALL WAS NOT FIGURED BY THE CONTRACTOR BECAUSE HE DID NOT THINK HE WOULD HAVE TO TAKE ALL THIS OUT; S0, THIS IS JUSTIFIED. MR. KONTOULAS REPORTED THAT ITEM 5 RELATES TO THE FACT THAT THE DRAWINGS CALL FOR THE EXISTING FINISH TO REMAIN, AND IF IT WERE TO REMAIN, WE WOULD NOT HAVE A FINISHED JOB RE AESTHETICS. ITEM 6 - BECAUSE OF EXISTING GRILLS IN THE WEST WALL OF THE OLD COMMISSION ROOM AND THE NECESSITY OF 3-4" CLEARANCE FOR HANGERS AND PANELS TO PUT IN THE DROPPED CEILING, THE CEILING HAD TO BE LOWERED AND A DUCT INSTALLED TO ALLOW FOR AIR CONDITIONING, WHICH IS A NECESSITY IN THAT BIG ROOM. ITEM 7 - MR. KONTOULAS EXPLAINED THAT THE BUILDING CODE REQUIRES THAT YOU HAVE AN EXHAUST FAN IN AN INTERIOR BATHROOM. COMMISSIONER fLETCHER NOTED THAT THIS WAS AN OMISSION OR OVERSIGHT ON THE ARCHITECT `S PART, AND COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK EM- PHASIZED THAT WE WANT AT COMPLETION TO BE ABLE TO DOCUMENT THE VARIOUS THINGS THAT HAVE COST US EXTRA MONEY THAT WERENIT OUR FAULT. ITEM S - MR. KONTOULAS EXPLAINED THAT ON FELONY CASES, THE CIRCUIT COURT JUDGES WILL NEED 14 SEATS IN THE JURY BOX - 12 JURORS AND 2 ALTERNATES® THEY ONLY HAVE 7 NOW. ITEM 9 - MR. KONTOULAS STATED THAT THE HARDWARE FOR THE ALUMINUM DOORS WAS NOT INCLUDED IN THE HARDWARE SCHEDULE, AND IT IS REQUIRED. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER FLETCHER, SECONDED BY COMMIS - SIGNER BIRD, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED CHANGE ORDER #5 AND AUTHORIZED THE SIGNATURE OF THE CHAIRMAN. N DEC 5 1980 BOQK 45 PAGGE 412 _ e RIVER COUNTY COMMISSION -�-HANGE �.. ., APCHII [J AR�H11I(T (,] ORDER CONTRA( TOT: ( ] - -- -- HIL D U 111 DOCUWti'T C.701 011UR i,RoIECT: Indian River County ,name address) County Courthoure TO (C ontractorl Reinhold Construct ion P,O.Box 666 Coco.), Florida 32922 CHANC;I ORDER NUMBER BOOK 45 Pat 413 5 ( five ) ARCI I l E C T'S PR()IECT N0:1664 CON1 KACT EOR Addition`, and Renovation,, Co NIKACT DATE: 1+-2-80 You a,,e directed to make the folio%%ing changes in this Contract: SEE ATTACHED SHEET The proposed changes in the work may result in additional time required boyond the contract completion date. Additional time will be added to the contract that is directly related to this change order. The contractor will be paid for the additional -required days at the rate of $300.00 (three hundred) per day for fired overhead costs. The number of days requested are reflected in CP -13, CP -17 and CP 20. Thr original Contract Sum ssas . . . . . . S NO Change by previous Change Orders S The Contract Sum Prior to this Change Order was S T) ,• Contract Sum will be (in(reased) (decreased) (unchangvdi by this Change Order . S The nes+ Contract Sum including this Change Order will be . • . • • • • S The Contract Time will be (increased) (decreased) (un(hanged) by Tt, . I)ate of Completion as of the date of this Change Order therefore Is CONNELL METCALF ri EDDY___ _ RE MHOLD 1011 -INC_ ARIMIICT C0',TRACT0t, c(-,uth_Dixie� Hight,,,ry_ -CONSTRUCT -- _ At(,rstl Gabit�,, Florida 3134 Cocoa (.., Florida 32922 By t i .:, Ark 0C1CL`A1%T G761 - (f/N'.(,l Os L)IR • APR(t 14'0 WITION, • Al,,* ' + 10-0 - 111E ­oiPii Ak% INSTrTGTE OF ARCHITECTS, 1735 ~Esti' YORK AbE , N%%, DC 2000 689,000.00 23,66;.90 712,665.90 41,168.32 73,8311.22 { ) Days. INDIAt-I RIVER COUNTY COMMISSION qq '�tiER 2 1''5 14th Avenue --- __-_ Address Vero Be Florida 32960_ PY - -- -- y—�i— o%E PAGE 1 � r � MR. KONTOULAS NEXT REVIEWED CHANGE ORDER #12 - COUNTY ADMINISTRATION BUILDING, WHICH COVERS THE FOLLOWING ITEMS: INDIAN RIVER COUNTY ADMI�ITSTRATION BUILDING CO # 1Z Item 1 CP -27 - Additional- work required to provide $26,908.39 suitable interior finishes to areas as noted in this Change Proposal. Item 2 CP -30 - Same as CP -27. 2,914.02 Item 3 CP -32 - Brace existing damage at structural 1,723.15 beam, move wall for AC unit and block up window. Item 4 CP -34 - Provide west wing penthouse for AC 10,876.76 equipment per Clarification #5. Item 5 CP -36 - Modify and provide hardware for 4,609.99 aluminum doors per specifications and not shown in Hardware Schedule. Item 6 Block up an ope►iing and provide an aluminum 687.98 framed window at Commission Chambers Hallway. TOTAL $47,720.29 ITEM 1 - MR. KONTOULAS STATED THAT THIS RELATES TO HAVING A FINISHED JOB, AND HE FELT HERE AGAIN, IT IS THE FAULT OF THE ARCHITECT FOR INSUFFICIENT INVESTIGATION OR JUST PLAIN GUESSWORK, AND THIS WOULD HOLD TRUE FOR ITEM 2 ALSO. ITEM 3 - WE HAVE AN EXISTING CONCRETE BEAM THAT MUST BE REPAIRED. MR. KONTOULAS REPORTED THAT NEITHER HE NOR THE CONTRACTOR KNEW ABOUT THIS UNTIL THE PLASTER CEILINGS WERE TORN"DOWN. HE DID NOT KNOW HOW THE BEAM LASTED ALL THESE YEARS WITHOUT COLLAPSING AND STATED THAT THIS WOULD HAVE TO BE CLASSIFIED AS UNFORESEEN. ITEM 4 - RE PROVIDING A WEST WING PENTHOUSE FOR AIR CONDI- TIONING EQUIPMENT. MR. KONTOULAS STATED THAT THE ARCHITECT -HAD PROVIDED VERY LITTLE INFORMATION ON THIS; THE ONLY THING CLARIFIED ON THE DRAWINGS WAS THE STRUCTURAL AND THERE WAS NO DOOR OR SIDING SPECIFIED OR SHOWN. HE CONTINUED THAT IN HIS SCHEDULE OF VALUES, THE CONTRACTOR HAD ALLOWED $6,500 FOR THE STRUCTURAL THAT WAS SHOWN AND ALSO ALLOWED $2,500 FOR DEMOLITION OF THE OLD STRUCTURE. �6 DEC 51980 BOOK 45 PAGE 414 _I DEC 5 1980 Box 45 PAGE 415 .ITEM 5 - MR. KONTOULAS STATED THAT HERE AGAIN THE ALUMINUM DOOR HARDWARE WAS NOT COVERED IN THE HARDWARE SCHEDULE EXCEPT FOR THE CYLINDERS. ITEM 6 - FROM THE COMMISSION ROOM HALLWAY TO A CORRIDOR ON THE WEST SIDE, WE HAVE TWO WINDOWS - ONE 6' AND ONE 2', AND THE 2' WINDOW THEY WANT TO BLOCK UP INTERFERES WITH THE AIR CONDITIONING BECAUSE THE CEILING HAS TO BE MUCH LOWER AT THAT -POINT. ALSO, THE FRAMING ON THE 6' WINDOW WAS NOT SPECIFIED IN THE DETAIL, AND THIS IS A NECESSARY ITEM. MR. KONTOULAS RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF CHANGE ORDER #12. MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER BIRD, SECONDED BY COMMIS- SIONER FLETCHER, TO APPROVE CHANGE ORDER #12 FOR THE COUNTY ADMINIS- TRATION BUILDING AND AUTHORIZE THE SIGNATURE OF THE CHAIRMAN. COMMISSIONER FLETCHER POINTED OUT THAT THE COVER SHEET ON THE CHANGE ORDER STATES THAT THE CONTRACTOR WILL BE PAID FOR THE ADDITIONAL REQUIRED DAYS AT THE RATE OF $300 PER DAY FOR FIXED OVER- HEAD COSTS; HOWEVER, ON THE 9TH SHEET OF THE PACKET COMPRISING THIS CHANGE ORDER, A LETTER FROM REINHOLD CONSTRUCTION TO THE ARCHITECT SETS OUT THAT THE FIXED OVERHEAD COSTS ARE $400 PER DAY, WHICH IS NOT CONSISTENT. SAID LETTER IS AS FOLLOWS: 10 M November fel-, 1980 Connell, Metcalf & Eddy, Inc. P. 0. Box 341939 Coral Gables, F1. 33134 Attn: Mr. F. Kirsch Re: IN-1IAN RIVER, CCUt'lry C!�11G11.G A! -,D. & R"t'!OV. V_�o e;_,acll, rLOP!DA Gentlemen: In response to your Change Proposal No. Z7 _, the Contractor will provide the changes pruposed in the work for an "lluunt of $2G, %9.59 A cost sunrilary of this proposal is attached. _ � To accomplish the proposed chances in the work try require 4 � additional days of Contract Time. The fixed overhead costs associated with this project are $A o: ccper day. Therefore, the total additional cost which ►-QJ result from the, extended time required is which includes allow- able general overhead and fee. If you wish to make the proposed changes in the work please issue a change order adjusting the Contract Sum and Time by the above amounts as soon as possible to avoid or minimize any delays which may otherwise occur and which would increase costs. This proposal is valid for j s days from this date, after which it is subject to withdrawal and revision. 9 Very truly yours, REINHAOLD CONSTRUCTION, INC. L. A. Snodgrass V ce-f res i dent MR. REINHOLD STATED THAT WAS A CLERICAL ERROR AND THE AMOUNT SHOULD BE $400 PER DAY. MR. KONTOULAS STATED THAT ANY CHANGE IN THE $300 FIGURE WAS NEWS TO HIM. HE CONTINUED THAT HE HAD A DISCUSSION THURSDAY IN MR. REINHOLD'S OFFICE, AND THE $400 FIGURE NEVER CAME UP; ALTHOUGH, HE HAS SEEN IT ON CERTAIN CHANGE ORDERS AND HAS ASKED THE ARCHITECT TO CLARIFY THIS. 11 DEC 51980 Bou 45 Fact- 416 DEC 51980 a©m -45 PAGF 417 MR. REINHOLD STATED THAT HE CAN ONLY REFER TO DIFFERENT LETTERS WHICH MENTION THE $400, HE NOTED THAT YESTERDAY WHEN THEY HAD THE MEETING, THE COVER PAGE HAD NOT BEEN TYPED, MR. KONTOULAS, ADMINISTRATOR NELSON, AND CHAIRMAN LYONS CONCURRED THAT $300 WAS ALL THAT MENTIONED YESTERDAY. COMMISSIONER BIRD ASKED HOW THE CONTRACTOR WOULD JUSTIFY $400 ON ONE BUILDING AND $300 ON THE OTHER. MR. REINHOLD POINTED OUT THAT IT IS JUSTIFIED BECAUSE WE ARE TALKING ABOUT TWO DIFFERENT PROJECTS AND TWO DIFFERENT CONTRACTS. THE ADMINISTRATION BUILDING IS ABOUT FIVE TIMES AS LARGE AN AREA, HE CONTINUED THAT THEY DON `T PAY ANY ELECTRIC BILLS FOR WORKING AT THE COURTHOUSE, BUT RIGHT NOW THEIR ELECTRIC BILLS AT THE ADMINIS- TRATION BUILDING ARE RUNNING $500-$600 A MONTH. DISCUSSION FOLLOWED AS TO WHETHER THIS IS THE FIRST TIME THE $400 FIGURE HAS BEEN ON A CHANGE ORDER, MR. REINHOLD STATED THAT IF THE FILES ON THE ADMINISTRATION BUILDING.WERE CHECKED, A FIGURE OF $400 WOULD BE FOUND ON CHANGE PROPOSALS. MR. KONTOULAS DID NOT AGREE AND FELT THIS IS SOMETHING THAT JUST CAME UP RECENTLY. CHAIRMAN LYONS DID NOT BELIEVE THAT UP TO NOW WE HAVE HAD +' ANY CHANGE ORDERS THAT INCLUDED EXTRA TIME AND POSSIBLY THAT IS WHY THE OVERHEAD FIGURE WAS NOT IN THE CONSIDERATIONS UP TO THIS TIME. COMMISSIONER BIRD ASKED IF THE $400 FIGURE IS SPELLED OUT IN THE CONTRACT OR WHETHER IT JUST CAME UP DURING THE COURSE OF CONSTRUCTION. MR. REINHOLD REPLIED THAT THEY DOCUMENTED THIS IN LETTERS WITH THE ARCHITECT. COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK ASKED IF THE COUNTY AUTHORIZED THE ARCHITECT TO GO TO $400 A DAY. CHAIRMAN LYONS STATED THAT HE WOULD HAVE TO LOOK AT THE CONTRACT BECAUSE HE DID NOT KNOW OFFHAND. HE ASSUMED THAT THE BOARD WANTED TO AHEAD AND APPROVE THE CHANGE ORDER AND ASKED IF IT COULD BE APPROVED ON THE BASIS THAT WE WILL VERIFY THE VALIDITY OF THE $400 FIGURE SO THAT WE CAN MOVE AHEAD WITH THE WORK AND GET THIS QUESTION SETTLED AT THE SAME TIME, r COMMISSIONER BIRD STATED THAT HE WOULD AMEND HIS MOTION THAT WAY IF DOCUMENTATION COULD BE FOUND WHERE THIS COMMISSION, AS PREVIOUSLY CONSTITUTED, APPROVED A $400 FIGURE; HE WOULD NOT BE IN FAVOR OF AGREEING TO $400 AS AGREED ON BY THE ARCHITECT WITHOUT ANY AUTHORIZATION FROM THIS COMMISSION. COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK SUGGESTED APPROVING THE CHANGE ORDER AT THE $300 FIGURE AND THEN VERIFYING THE VALIDITY OF THE $400 CHARGE. CHAIRMAN LYONS FELT THAT WE MAY NOT BE ABLE TO SHOW WHERE THE COUNTY COMMISSION SPECIFICALLY APPROVED THE $400, BUT IT MAY HAVE BEEN APPROVED ON THE BASIS OF THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS AND WHAT- EVER WE AGREED THE ARCHITECT COULD D0, MR. REINHOLD STATED THAT HE WOULD GO ALONG WITH SIGNING THIS CHANGE ORDER AT THE $300 FIGURE PROVIDING THE RECORD SHOWS IT WILL BE RE-EVALUATED. COMMISSIONER BIRD AGREED TO WITHDRAW HIS PREVIOUS MOTION, AND COMMISSIONER FLETCHER TO WITHDRAW HIS SECOND, AND TO RESTATE THE MOTION AS FOLLOWS: ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BIRD, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER FLETCHER, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED CHANGE ORDER #12, INCLUDING THE ADDITIONAL CHARGE OF $300 PER DAY SUBJECT TO FURTHER VERIFICATION AS DISCUSSED AND AUTHORIZED THE SIGNATURE OF THE CHAIRMAN. 13 DSC 5190 Boa 45 PACE 41.8 DEC 51980 am 45 PA cE4 9 r _.-CHANGE ORDER 00CUAILNI G701 OWNTR (-1 AK( fill ICT (, CONTRACTOR ( , HELD [] WlitR PKOJECT: Indian River County ,narttc,,ddiess) County Administration Buildintl Tn (Contractor) F Reinhold Construction P,O.Box 666 Cocoa, Florida 32922 Cl-iANGE OKDER NUMBER: 12 ( twelve ) -� ARCIiITECT'S PK()JECT NO: 9363 CONTRACT EOK: Additions and Renovations L J CONTRACT DATE: April 2, 1980 lou are directed to male the following changes in this Contract: SEE ATTACHED SHEET she proposed changes in the work may result in additional time required hevnnd the contract completion date. Additional time will be added to the contract that is directly related to this change order. The con- tractor will be paid for the additional required days at the rate of $300.00 (three hundred) per day for fixed overhead costs. The number of days requested are reflected in CP -27, CP -30, CP -32 and CP 34. The original Contract Sum was . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 2 , 748 , 000.00 Net change by previous Change Orders . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . $ 128,996.66 The Contract Sum prior to this Change Order was . . . . . . S 29876,996.66 The Contract Sum will be (increased) (decreased) (unchanged) by this Change Order . $ 47,720.29 The new Contract Sum including this Change Order will be . . . . . . . . . . $ 2,924,716.95 The Contract Time will be (increased) (decreased) (unchanged) by { ) Days. The Date of Completion as of the date of this Change Order therefore is CONNELL METCALF t; EDDY RE.INHOLD_ CONSTRUCTION INC.__ INDIAN_-RI-RI.COMMISSION n ' H) E — — — - --�_.- ---- O. 1 F.ACTC)Y OWNER f��" rbuth_Dixie Highway - Fb''ox 666 - _ 2145__14t_h_A_yenue._._ Address Address Address Coral Gables, Florida 331311 Cocoa, FI Arida 32922 Vergi-�:7_lgrida_3�9f)� ---------`--- -- ----�- --- j j Z - i� BY — — -C: cr — �f r.•� t. B DATE---- --- --BATE-- AIA DOCUMINT G'01 - CHANCE ORDIR • APRIL 19'0 ID1710-4 • AIA! • m 19'0 • THE INSTITl,TE Of ARCHITtCTS, 1735 N[W MURK A%'E., NK', %VASIW-670N, D C. 20006 0%[ PAGE L THERE BEING NO FURTHER BUSINESS, ON MOTION MADE, SECONDED AND CARRIED, THE BOARD ADJOURNED AT 5:30 O'CLOCK P.M, ATTEST: CLERK 15 DEC 51980 BOOK 45 PAGE 42 WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 17, 1980 THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, MET IN REGULAR SESSION AT THE CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 1053 20TH PLACE, VERO BEACH, FLORIDA, ON WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 17, 1980, AT 8:30 O'CLOCK A.M. PRESENT WERE PATRICK B. LYONS, CHAIRMAN; WILLIAM C. WODTKE, JR., VICE CHAIRMAN; DICK BIRD; ALFRED GROVER FLETCHER; AND DON C. SCURLOCK, SJR, ALSO PRESENT WERE•NEIL A. NELSON, COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR; L.S. "TOMMY" THOMAS, INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATOR; GEORGE G. COLLINS, .JR., ATTORNEY TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS; .JEFFREY K. BARTON, FINANCE DIRECTOR; BAILIFF DAN FLEISCHMAN; AND VIRGINIA HARGREAVES AND JANICE CALDWELL, DEPUTY CLERKS. THE CHAIRMAN CALLED THE MEETING TO ORDER. CHAIRMAN LYONS LED THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG, AND ADMINISTRATOR NELSON GAVE THE INVOCATION. THE CHAIRMAN ASKED IF THERE WERE ANY ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA. ADMINISTRATOR NELSON REQUESTED ADDING AN ITEM CONCERNING SOME PLANT LIFE WHICH MIGHT BE CONSIDERED AN ENDANGERED SPECIES - IT IS LOCATED IN THE SOUTH PORTION OF THE COUNTY. CHAIRMAN LYONS REQUESTED ADDING A DISCUSSION REGARDING THE HARRIS SANITATION SYSTEM; AND AN ITEM REGARDING THE HOSPITAL BOARD OF TRUSTEES' BONDS. HE ADDED AN ITEM REGARDING THE INSTALLATION OF THE ROCKRIDGE PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION OFFICERS ON JANUARY 5TH, AND COMMISSIONER BIRD STATED HE WOULD BE PRESENT -AT THE INSTALLATION. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER BIRD, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED ADDING THE EMERGENCY ITEMS LISTED ABOVE. THE CHAIRMAN ASKED IF THERE WERE ANY ADDITIONS OR CORRECTIONS TO THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF NOVEMBER 19, 1980. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER BIRD, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED THE MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 19, 1980, AS WRITTEN. wx 45 PxGE.421 DEC 171980 DEC 17 NO BOOK . 5 -pAf F 4 2 THE CHAIRMAN ASKED IF THERE WERE ANY ADDITIONS OR CORRECTIONS TO THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF DECEMBER 3, 1980. COMMISSIONER FLETCHER REFERRED TO PAGE 5, SECOND PARAGRAPH FROM THE BOTTOM, AND REQUESTED THE PARAGRAPH BE CHANGED TO READ: "MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER BIRD, THAT THE BOARD AUTHORIZE INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATOR THOMAS TO PROCEED WITH THE ISSUANCE OF TAX ANTICIPATION NOTES IN THE AMOUNT OF $300,000 IN INCREMENTS OF $50,000 OR $100,000." ALSO, THE FOLLOWING PARAGRAPH IS TO BE ADDED: "THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. IT WAS VOTED ON AND CARRIED WITH A VOTE OF 4 TO 1, WITH COMMISSIONER FLETCHER VOTING IN OPPOSITION," COMMISSIONER FLETCHER REQUESTED THAT ON PAGE 33, LINE 22, CHANGE THE WORD " BULK `t TO "BULB." COMMISSIONER FLETCHER ASKED FOR CLARIFICATION ON PAGE 50, THIRD SENTENCE, AND FELT THE WORDS "FULL COMMISSION" SHOULD BE OMITTED. AFTER SOME DISCUSSION, IT WAS AGREED TO ADD THE WORD ° SCHEDULED " AND OMIT "FULL COMMISSION." ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER BIRD, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF DECEMBER 3, 1980, AS WRITTEN. THE MINUTES OF THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING OF THE ROCKRIDGE SUBDIVISION STREET LIGHTING DISTRICT WILL CONTAIN THE APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF DECEMBER 3, 1980. DISCUSSION FOLLOWED ON ITEM 2 REGARDING THE UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION PAYMENT. FINANCE DIRECTOR BARTON EXPLAINED THE PROCEDURE THAT NOTIFICA- TION OF A CLAIM IS SENT TO THE FINANCE DEPARTMENT AND THEN TO PERSONNEL, AND IF NO OBJECTION IS MADE TO THE CLAIM WITHIN A CERTAIN PERIOD OF TIME, PAYMENT OF THE CLAIM IS MADE. COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK REQUESTED THE INFORMATION ON THIS PROCEDURE, AND ADMINISTRATOR NELSON ADVISED HE WOULD COME BACK TO THE BOARD WITH A FULL REPORT. DISCUSSION FOLLOWED ON ITEM 4 REGARDING THE PAYMENT OF INTEREST ON THE CASH BOND FOR LAURELWOOD UNIT III. PETER ROBINSON, REPRESENTING LAUREL HOMES, CAME BEFORE THE BOARD AND REVIEWED THE HISTORY OF LAURELWOOD UNITS I AND II WHERE THE INTEREST ON THE CASH BOND WAS RECEIVED EVEN THOUGH THERE HAD BEEN NO FORMAL AGREEMENT. ATTORNEY COLLINS STATED HE KNEW OF NO AFFIRMATIVE ACTION WHERE THE COUNTY INTENDED TO RETAIN THE INTEREST, AND WAS NOT AWARE OF ANY CHANGE. THE BOARD DECIDED IT HAD NO PROBLEM WITH PAYING THE INTEREST AS IT DID IN UNITS I AND II. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BIRD, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED THE CHAIRMAN'S SIGNATURE REGARDING THE FOLLOWING DEPUTIES APPOINTED BY SHERIFF JOYCE: MARK C. JOHNSON CHARLES R. .JUSTICE RICK B. MATTHEWS THOMAS E. JEN KINS ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BIRD, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED THE BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION PAYMENT, AS FOLLOWS: ACCOUNT TITLE ACCOUNT N0. INCREASE DECREASE UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION 004-214-541-12.15 $ 740 UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION 004-205-515-12.15 $ 245 RESERVE FOR CONTINGENCIES 004-199-513-99.91 $ 985 UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION 001-210-572-12.15 $ 1,330 RESERVE FOR CONTINGENCIES 001-199-513-99.91 $ 1,330 sooK 45 FtcE423 DEC 171980 3 DEC 171990 Rook 45, PAGE 4?4 ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BIRD, SECONDED -BY COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK, THE BOARD APPROVED THE CHAIRMAN'S SIGNATURE ON FORM 02709 REGARDING THE REVENUE SHARING ACT, WITH A VOTE OF 4 TO 1, WITH. COMMISSIONER FLETCHER VOTING IN OPPOSITION. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BIRD, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED THE PAYMENT OF INTEREST ON THE CASH BOND FOR LAURELWOOD UNIT III. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BIRD, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED THE STATE WITNESS PAYROLL, CIRCUIT COURT, FALL TERM, 1980, IN THE AMOUNT OF $43.16. THE FOLLOWING REPORT WAS RECEIVED AND PLACED ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK: REPORT OF CONVICTIONS, MONTH OF NOVEMBER, 1980 APPROVAL OF COMMUNITY SERVICE TRUST FUND GRANT AGREEMENT DISCUSSION ENSUED ABOUT THE NAMES OF THE AGENCIES TO BE FUNDED NOT BEING MENTIONED ON THE AGREEMENT, IT WAS DETERMINED THAT THE WORK PROGRAMS DESCRIBING THE AGENCY WERE ATTACHED TO THE AGREE - MENTA FINANCE DIRECTOR BARTON EXPLAINED THAT THE BOARD HAD ALREADY APPROVED THE GRANT APPLICATION. ON MOTION MADE BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, SECONDED BY COMMIS- SIONER BIRD, THE BOARD AUTHORIZED THE SIGNATURE OF THE CHAIRMAN FOR THE COMMUNITY SERVICES TRUST FUND GRANT AGREEMENT,,WHICH INCLUDES THE VOCATIONAL TRAINING AND SHELTERED WORKSHOP, AND THE INDIAN RIVER COUNTY COUNCIL ON AGING, WITH A VOTE OF 4 TO 1 WITH COMMISSIONER FLETCHER VOTING IN OPPOSITION. THE COMMUNITY SERVICES TRUST FUND GRANT AGREEMENT IS ON FILE IN ITS ENTIRETY IN THE CLERK'S OFFICE. ,,� -Tv C-='v''_C ESC.., FUND G:t=NT AGREl .17-4- THIS AGREEMENT, beginning the lst day of OC )RER 19 80 , between the State of Florida Department of Community Affairs (hereinafter referred to as "Depart.ment") , an agency of the State of Florida, with headquarters 'in the City of Tallahassee, and INDIAN RIVER COUNTY BOARD OF pUNTY COM"ISSTONFRS (hereinafter referred to as the "Grantee") . THIS AGREEMENT (CONTRACT) IS ENTERED INTO BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FACTS: The Department, in furtherance of its duties under Sections 409.501 through 409.5064 Florida Statutes has determined that the Grantee has applied and qualifies for a, grant under the Florida Financial Assistance for Community Services Act. NOW, THEREFORE, THE PARTIES HERETO DO.MUTUALLY AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1. Services. Grantee will provide the services described in the attached work program(s) , by this reference made a part of this agreement. 2. Incort)oration of Rules. Both, Grantee and Department will be governed by applicable law and rules, including but not limited to §§409.501--.506, Florida Statutes and Rule 9C-2, Florida Administrative Code. 3. Comnensation. a) The Department agrees to pay the Grantee the total sum of $6, 293'00 for the twelve month period beginning October 1, 1980 b) Contingent upon Grantee's performance of services and submission of timely reports rernr_red by Rule 9C-2 F.A.C. , said funds shall be paid by the Department in equal quarterly amounts. Page 1 of 3 DEC 17 1980 45 PAU-€425 Revised 8/79 .59 DEC 171980 (c) Comnensat_or, is 4urther contink4ant upon availabili�.� aoo .45 QacE 426 f - c i 1'"y Servs ceS `"'"uSt �'1i1Q .reale ,7y o. lads from the Ccs: -,un -- Chanter 409, F.S. 4. Matchinc Funds and Budcet. The Grantee will provide as matching funds for services under this agreement the following amounts: - $3,147,00 Cash f, $3,146,00 In -Kind Sources for matching funds_ and expenditures for all funds under this agreement shall be governed by budget attached here and -made a cart of this agreement. 5. Delegate Acencies. Grantee may delegat6 to other agencies the performance of services under this agreement. Such delegate agencies must be identified in the work program attached to this agreement. Grantee shall be responsible for the performance of its delegates and will monitor their activities accordingly. In the event of delegate's non-compliance with the work, program, opera -- - ting budget, or the terms of this agreement, Grantee agrees to restore to the Depart -men -t- the grant funds inappropriately scent whether by the Grantee or the delegate agency. 6. Modifications to Agreement. The Department or Grantee may, from time to time request changes in the scope of the services or the operating budget under this agreement._ Such changes, which are mutually acceptable to the carties shall be incorporated in writing as amendments to this agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Department and the_ Grantee have executed _I this P.greement ds of the date first above written. FOR TH G, NTEE STATE OF FLORIDA"- DEPARTMENT OF CO: L'1UNITY r1F FAIRS BAY : k6i navur . - (Signature) ChVirman, Board g of C un Commissioners Indian Riv ount Florida _ Secretary Mavor or Chairman or-misYsion Goan M. Heqaen, (Type Name and Title) (Type Name and Title) DATE December 17, 1980 DATE Pace 2 0` 3 COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER I hereby certify that on this day, before me, a Notary Public duly authorized in the state and county named above tc take acknowledgements, p ersonally appeared Patrick B. Lyons (Name) to me known to be the person desdribed as Chairman I (Title) O.= INDIAN RIVER COUNTY BOARD OF COU�JTY COMEj_,9_S_j_CPiEXSqo executed the (Name of Grantee) foregoing instrument, and he/she acknowledged before me that _ he/she executed it in the name of and for INDIAN RIVER COUNTY (Name of Grantee) BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS affixing its seal, and that he/she was duly authorized by that governing body of the INDIAN RIVER (Name of Grantee) COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERSto do so. WITNESS my hand and official seal in the county and state 17th da named above this y of December lg 80 Y w Notary P is my Commission Ex"Dires: 7ARY SIC SSArE C* HIDA AS MY COMMISSION EVINS �'� 1932 13 e Page 3 of 3 �� 4 7 DEC 171980 a r nrr 7 7 loon a FLORIDA FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE FOR COMMUNITY SERVICES ACT OF 1974 (COMMUNITY SERVICES TRUST FUND) GRANT APPLICATION Page 1 of 7 BOOK 45 PAGE 428 REPLY TO: * SUBMIT FOUR (4) COPIES DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS (ONE MUST BE ORIGINAL) DIVISION OF COMMUNITY SERVICES 2571 EXECUTIVE CENTER CIRCLE, EAST * PLEASE TYPE - ANSWER ALL TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA 32301 QUESTIONS 1. Local Governmental Unit Applying for Grant: Name: INDIAN RIVER COUNTY Telephone: (305) 562-7927 name of town, city or county) Address: P. 0. Box 1028, Vero Beach, Florida zip: 32960 ° County: Indian River 2. Delegate Agency (s) VOCATIONAL TRAINING AND SHELTERED WORKSHOP & INDIAN RIVER COUNTY COUNCIL ON AGING 3. Person with over-all responsibility of grant: (Our Department will contact this person should questions arise) Name: See Below Address: Signature: Telephone: ( ) 4. Name and address of person authorized to receive funds. If this ap- plication is funded, checks will be mailed to this person. All checks will be made payable to the local government. Name: Kathleen Garrett - Finance Office Address: P. 0. Box 1028 Vero Beach, Florida zip: 32960 3. Vocational Training and Sheltered Workshop John M. Rezanka (305)562-6854 1385 16th Avenue Vero Beach, Florida 32960 Indian River County Council on Aging - _ L. S. "Tommy" Thomas (305)562-4186 _ Room 115 - County Courthouse Vero Beach, Florida 32960 X11 111 ► _: ►.► �' ►! � ► :__. � INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATOR THOMAS EXPLAINED THAT THERE ARE APPROXIMATELY $45,000 IN BILLS THAT WERE MADE, BASED ON PRIOR COMMITMENTS BY THE BOARD; AND IN ORDER TO KEEP THE COUNTY'S CREDIT, - HE FELT THE BILLS SHOULD BE PAID. MR. THOMAS FELT -THE METHOD OF HAVING A GENERAL OBLIGATION NOTE FOR $300,000 WAS THE MOST ACCEPTABLE METHOD OF FINANCING THE ENGINEERING AND OTHER COSTS PERTAINING TO THE EXTENSION OF INDIAN RIVER BOULEVARD, COMMISSIONER FLETCHER COMMENTED THAT HE HAD NO PROBLEM PAYING WHAT THE PREVIOUS BOARD HAD COMMITTED, BUT HE WAS OPPOSED TO THE INDIAN RIVER BOULEVARD EXTENSION PROJECT. DISCUSSION FOLLOWED ABOUT THE PROJECT. CHAIRMAN LYONS ELABORATED ON WHAT THE ENGINEERS FELT WAS THE MOST EFFECTIVE WAY TO HANDLE THE DRAINAGE IN THE COUNTRY CLUB POINTE AREA. MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK, SECONDED BY COM- MISSIONER BIRD, THAT THE BOARD GO FORWARD AND CONTINUE WITH THE INDIAN RIVER BOULEVARD EXTENSION PROJECT, AND ASKED FOR A ROLL CALL VOTE. THE CHAIRMAN CALLED THE ROLL AND THE VOTE WAS AS FOLLOWS: AYES: COMMISSIONER WODTKE COMMISSIONER BIRD COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK CHAIRMAN LYONS NAYES: COMMISSIONER FLETCHER CHAIRMAN LYONS STATED THAT HIS REASON WAS THAT THIS ROAD WAS AN IMPORTANT PART OF OUR TOTAL ROAD PATTERN, AND THE COUNTY NEEDED THAT BY-PASS TO U.S.#1; IT IS GOING TO SERVE THE 6TH AVENUE AREA; AND IT WILL BE A LINK TO GIFFORD, THE CHAIRMAN STRESSED THAT IT IS TIME THAT THE COUNTY RELIEVED SOME OF THE TRAFFIC ON U.S. #1. HE ANNOUNCED THAT THE MOTION CARRIED WITH A VOTE OF 4 TO 1. PETE NOEL, LOCAL NEWSMAN, ASKED COMMISSIONER FLETCHER TO EXPLAIN WHY HE VOTED AGAINST CONTINUING WITH THIS PROJECT. DEC 171980 9 im 45 fufq'"219 DEC 17 1980 saok 45 '' 43 COMMISSIONER FLETCHER RESPONDED THAT INDIAN RIVER BLVD. WAS A TWO LANE ROAD GOING INTO A FOUR LANE ROAD, AND IT IS BEING BUILT BECAUSE IT MAY SAVE SOMEONE FIVE MINUTES TO GET TO THE HOSPITAL. HE CONTINUED THAT IT IS BEING BUILT TWO LANE BECAUSE THERE IS NOT ENOUGH MONEY, AND IT IS BEING BUILT IN A SWAMP AT A COST OF $2,000,000 FOR A ONE MILE ROAD. COMMISSIONER FLETCHER NOTED THAT THIS WAS ANOTHER AREA WHERE SOMEONE ELSE IS MONEY WAS BEING SPENT, AND HE FELT THE ROAD WAS NOT THAT CRITICAL OF A NEED FOR INDIAN RIVER COUNTY. HE THOUGHT THAT IF OUR OWN DOLLARS, THAT WERE GENERATED RIGHT HERE IN THE COUNTY, WERE BEING SPENT, HE DID NOT THINK THE BOARD WOULD VOTE IN FAVOR OF THIS PROJECT. COMMISSIONER FLETCHER THOUGHT THE BOARD WAS VOTING FOR IT BECAUSE IT IS FEDERAL MONEY. MONEY. COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK INTERJECTED THAT IT WAS THE COUNTY'S MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER BIRD TO ADOPT RESOLUTION N0. 80-132 AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF A GENERAL OBLIGATION NOTE, NOT TO EXCEED $300,000, TO FINANCE ENGINEERING AND OTHER COSTS RELATED TO THE INDIAN RIVER BLVD. EXTENSION. THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. IT WAS VOTED ON AND CARRIED WITH A VOTE OF 4 TO 1, WITH COMMISSIONER FLETCHER VOTING IN OPPOSITION. MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK, SECONDED BY COM- MISSIONER BIRD, THAT THE CHAIRMAN BE AUTHORIZED TO SIGN THE GENERAL OBLIGATION NOTE, DUE ON OR BEFORE ONE YEAR FROM THE DATE OF ISSUE. THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. IT WAS VOTED ON AND CARRIED WITH A VOTE OF 4 TO 1, WITH COMMISSIONER FLETCHER VOTING IN OPPOSITION. 10 RESOLUTTOII N(O. 80- 132 A RESOLUTION ' 11r ISSUTANCE OF GENERAL OBLIGATION NOTE OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA NOT TO EXCEEM $300,000.00 TO FINANCE ENGINEERING COSTS AND OTHER COSTS RELATED TO TIIE ENTENSTON OF INDTAi`I RIVER BOULEVARD 17 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that this Resolution is adopted pursuant to provisions of Section 125.01, Florida Statutes, and other applicable provisions of law; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that Indian River County is hereby authorized to borrow by General Obligation Note, from The First Citrus Bank of Indian River- County, THREE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($300,000.00) to be paid back within one (1) year from date from tax revenues that aro pledc)ed by the CoLint %'; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the apprnpri.ate off icer s- arcs authorized to execute Lhe necussary duc:urlents, including the General Obligation Note to The First Citrus Bank of Indian River County; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the funds derived from the General Obligation Note shell he deposited in the COUNTY account and used solely for engineering costs and other costs related to the expansion of Indian River Boulevard. Said Resolution shall become effective as of the 17th day of December, 1980. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA By: _ I trickB. Lyo s, jeairman Attest: Freda Wright, Clrk DEC 171980 800K 45 FAGE ��1 DEC 171980 Box 4& PtGE 432 $300,000.00 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER GENERAL OBLIGATION NOTE KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that Indian River County, County, Florida (he.reinafter referred to as "County"), for value received, hereby promises to pay to the bearer, on December 22, 1981, the principal sum of TIiREE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($300,000.00), with inter(:st thereon at the rate of nine and one-half percentum per annum, payable at the maturity hereof or before, at County's option, upon presentation and surrender of this Note. Both principal and interest on this Note are payable in lawful money of the United States of America at The First Citrus Bank of Indian River County, Vero Beach, Florida. For the prompt payment of the principal of and interest on this Note as the same shall become due, the ad valorem taxing power of the County for the fiscal year 1980-81 at an annual rate not to exceed ten (10) mills on the dollar of assessed value are irrevocahly pledged. This Note is in the aggregate principal amount of $300,000.00, issued to advance funds to finance engineering costs and other costs related to the extension of Indian. River Boulevard (herein called the "Project"), under the authority of and in full compliance with the Constitution and Statutes of the State of Florida, including Section 125.01, Florida Statutes, and other applicable provisions of law, and pursuant to a Resolution of the County duly adopted on the 17th day of December, 1980 (herein- after called the "Resolution"). This Note is subject to all the terms and conditions of said Resolution. It is certified and recited that all acts, conditions, and things required to happen, tc exist and to be performed, precedent to and in the issuance of this Note, have happened, exist, and have leen perfc>r:jeci in due t.ii-a,, form arca manner as required by thr' C'on.'�titut_io�t, an,? Laws oI t:',i( StliLe of Florida, applicable thereto; that +_-!-le -ota1 in,11J)te(iness of the County, including _ M M this Note, does not exceed any constitutional, statutcry, -)r other limitations; and that -)rovisions have been :;lade for tl.o levy and collection of ,-i ui3-,-:ct innu,:]_ t.i:•: Lor the fiscal yc:_ir 1980-81, at an annual rate n(-) t: to exc�2ud L" -!n (10) ciiill:� on the dollar of assessed val.ur, upon all property subjc�c-t to taxation by the County, sufficient to pay the principal of incl interest on this Note as the same shall become due, which tax shall be levied and collected it the s,wie time :.ind in the ,am manner as other ad valorem taxes of the County are assessed, levied and collected. This Note is redeemable prior to its stated date of maturity at option of County without payment or premium or penalt. This Note is and has all the dualities of a negotiable instrument under the law merchant and the laws of the State of Florida. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Indian River County, Florida, has issued this Note and has caused the same to be executed by the manual or facsimile signature of the Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners and the corporate seal of said County or a facsimile thereof to be affixed hereto or impressed hereon, and attested and countersigned by the manual or facsimile signature of the Clerk of the Board, all as of the (SEAL) ATTESTED AND COUNTERSIGNED: day of December, 1980. INDIAN RI COUNTY By • .. Cl airman, Board of Commissioners Clerk, Board of County Commissioners DEC 171980 ty -I it DEC 17 1980 BOOK 4125 PAGE 434 DISCUSSION RE: SOUTH COUNTY WATER PROJECT FINANCING THE BOARD NEXT DISCUSSED THE FOLLOWING LETTERS: C,,mb q, 1930 Mr. Neil A. Ne Won County Administr;;tor Tlldi..In River Cou.!It7 I',u rh:,:i:;•. 2415 14th Avonu,. Vero Beach, Plor ida 3296)0 •\11:\til,\.i.I,•!<.i� •• , i RR: Indian ]aver Count .♦, WaL,:r System Bond Anticilvition >t:' Dear Nei 1 : Per my conversat: inn y— —rjAy with T ony `I' urnas, I Kam ad- d russins) tIt K 1 r to In ni i v 1 i'iggi;rI In !lion! 1 i a t I'rl helow. Tommy advises me that you and the Chairman of the County Board of Commissioners hav- mot with rnprer,entatives of Sverdrup & V ircul and LP . aI Iw•rr, %un. ,tinii ai:;tratic)n (I'ii;liA) Lo r1t Wrminn Lha.' hr'!;t .,nd inl�:;r xpproach t,) t h,, a hove referencod projerl and it r� It is my un.l;.r.:;tancliny Qat you have jointly decided to nr.ocoed on a one contract haK i q, C,,mb q, 1930 Mr. Neil A. Ne Won County Administr;;tor Tlldi..In River Cou.!It7 I',u rh:,:i:;•. 2415 14th Avonu,. Vero Beach, Plor ida 3296)0 •\11:\til,\.i.I,•!<.i� •• , i RR: Indian ]aver Count .♦, WaL,:r System Bond Anticilvition >t:' Dear Nei 1 : Per my conversat: inn y— —rjAy with T ony `I' urnas, I Kam ad- d russins) tIt K 1 r to In ni i v 1 i'iggi;rI In !lion! 1 i a t I'rl helow. Tommy advises me that you and the Chairman of the County Board of Commissioners hav- mot with rnprer,entatives of Sverdrup & V ircul and LP . aI Iw•rr, %un. ,tinii ai:;tratic)n (I'ii;liA) Lo r1t Wrminn Lha.' hr'!;t .,nd inl�:;r xpproach t,) t h,, a hove referencod projerl and it : (i.nancirlq requirement:;. It is my un.l;.r.:;tancliny Qat you have jointly decided to nr.ocoed on a one contract haK i q, rAhvr than with the Met, contract approach prvviously atmtemplatni vIP6 that if all ynog acct,rdinq to plan, the i'n!NA will S. clrgmred to i` sm, its take out coicmAtmen! Want :n,nctim' in ''larch or .'1nril "f 1981. In light A t'!ll:, revi_,i Ki, mr, . arUonc vt_ this letter i::: 1) to MCA fV the C-11 i ` bri ' n !it' i 1 n•',l in my Novem!)or t.(I :It t "mpf r;) (.I'll, i : �1 ,,1 .r�' ',III :i: :i�;t: you with thy' 1 I:t.ar i m t' ] n;!no i n,l Il .I:; t i III- l V :i manner a,, ;WAS i t) t rr. 1 ::,rket condi tionq arc .,,1.'!1 thal int'''i",A ratj9 i are rapidly ,pproachinl_1, and in oalo cm '>:Cc ndiIri. til'_' historic MY, r,f 1 I:,t Wt t 1.'+ i m . ," - Idq .,t. i 1 1 n t i ,t heth,eo" 'j 1�.1,:' .,!l F as— .. "Il:r' hold ld A -it- n'i').it iron ni)tes an,f ,!lot t to—rill i-',, i�l r'. y'. .'1 .• )!)I I j I� 1 1', .. Oi1L or 1(1111.11. lilt lit 11 id '- 11 1.. i:, ,;It' -• )!lI!:i!)•It1 `11 N',it' :, (13AN':) Lrl ii _ t il! 1 ;r; ,'1t !w r:,; l !),)nd t s �._�, i.Io.00 , (' it'C')W ' )., •1"l ii,'�•i:, t. „ „t. 1'1,l t:1 C' t Cu.`itE'c_ !`.0 L:`.V(':it i:.': in 1 r:liRent or col ]at t'•r,ll 1 .. ;+'t'ilt I I 1'11 1 1 f t't'^ tp1' t:I t' L ll:;t_ of .i t:'1k,� oil' (.,o lilt i, tt ine;i ". t : + r i r-il it i' ,`IIA. Tho F I HA 'gt)uLd t11'_rr'h';' ClJ:i1111rt tc) i'`1 i :11'- !7•)'11:;, Il.bjt'^t t Cta:ii col1Cl L t ioii-'3 . In June 1.930, tht, Co, in h() cl $ 150,01)11 1-roin Fir:,t t'i; rtl , 13,1nk tor t -i,(. folluwincj ,)LIC1)+-),; 1) to �ic qn i re a 411 :i( -l'+ ; i t)' t -or t Ii = ,'vorst, o!".11.0:" 1 plant; and 2) to finance :i tt!:it ',aol l clr i ll in,t r)rwir. am. Bond counsel and underwrib_,rCi counsel ilav'_' acivised again:,' i:;suing BAN.; inc.lusiae ()r that "450,000.00. Further, tae cannot allow roloa (-,� of 1:1`! Of the BAN:-, nriyct od.,, for .;I -t. uct ion (1L aw(It)wrl Ur• ft): t:titi LItint 1 1 such t LIC!'' ,1:7, th- R,01A talo nut coiiii:li tt-rioiit' 1­ttor i:; i,1 hand. Therefor^, sub jo? t to till? t (.)1.'11'' t :i appriw,ll r Vt cotlId to Issu(' BAN:; iIl t11e Ipil t.ox LIn•lt+' ,l al) lilt r) 1. ), 375,000 4JLtll not. BANS procef:r'i.: t-,:;crc)t•J d an:1 i nvo.,ted tilt i 1 r''ct_-i 1)t :)y tilt_' Trustee of tilt-' FmHA tako o!!' cominittment lot -ter. .Sub]t'_':t tr) Inilrk"t ("-onclit-ion'; •111'1 'y'i+''l,l .;j)rt',t•l:; fat:! lR:I`•' Cl.t`:'" to: l_) fil()(Ii l y thy'! I7r L:1c' x);11 „l )lint of 1-11+` iiAN; ; to trot o,. '_ f -h" .;f?C".ul" LtV of t -'ho r1ilL'' iii)l+3 'r ' "n 1 2) requunt; the BOIL .1 UL to pass a reg olut iur, L-) al.lowahl� int:"r't�:;fi r..�t � (thi.; -ll,ly have :104-I1 covered atlr_cluat''Iv by r , :-r)l;ltit,n 1.1';k. S1)r incl, hitt h<>u l t1 hc! t:httc , tl r))-C?arn contact in,., or, in ilt';'1' i 1 1 `•r 11 11)1):1 ;hOal t1 yc-'u ?1•a':'e any que:;t- ions or r,• lu i ;-cam ild i t ion.l i c- lar if ic.1t i tin. wo will iiW.l lt. your 'lt't'.. 1, 11 .l Vit) !Iow I 1: hoard G. EGLJr/nb cc: Mr. Patrick 13. Lyons Mr. Richard Bird Mr. Grover Fletchor Mr. Don Scurlock Mr. William C. Wodt:r:'*, Jr. Por. L. S. 'Phorias Mr. George Collins Mr. Jud Freeman, Jr.. Mr. Charlie IILlrinelI Mr. Bill Weather-. Mr. WMA:: t:; DEC 17 1980 15 5 pAGE JU5 I DEC 17 1980 0 SVERDRUP & PARCFI. ANL` ASSOCIATLS, INC. ANr) BEINDOHF AND ASS(!c1AILS, INC 'A Joi'.1 vl'JI(II'.I ) i'rOIe(:r N„ December 12, 1980 TO: MEMORANDUM FOR RECORD N"il A. Nelsen, County i(itnrinistrator ir.dian River County i RCM: J�,hn A. Rohh i ns RL: Weting,, vi th I mllA in,I Count y (' r ,g,nnt�l moo 6 ,GE436 On 1)"01111i;er £,, 1920. a moet.inq wdq hold in the conference room of the Joint Venture. Persons in attendance were as follows: John A. Robbins `'verch-up & Parcel - Vero Peach Jerry Ballard `;verclr•up h Parcel - Gainesvi 1 le Neil A. Nelson County Administrator - Indian River County Pat Lyons Chairman. Cnunty Commission - In.diar. River• County George Collins County Attorney - Indian River County Tommy Thomas County Finance Coordinator - Indiarn River County Tom Brown FmHA - Gainesville - Stop Office Charles Hudnell FmHA - 440,t Palm Peach - District Office Dorthy O'Neal I mI IA - West Palm lleac:h - ti i s tr i c t Of I icn The meeting was held to discuss the current status of the County', projects which are beiny funded i;y WMA. Gelow is listed the projects which were discussed and a synopsis of the discu,sinns held for each project. YjUTll COUNTY 'WAI ER SY'� I L^1 iPt('l;t'•` C'1(N 1 rn"I i nrcr''', i'roje( t N"w. t,t The major discussion on this project with FmHA regarded the specif i(. funding, condition; of the pro,jec:t, and the adminintraLion of contract; for •thu actual work. The Joint Venture had intended to pr•t`(,,nn three m,r.jrlr cunlract.,, whit h would 1,11 bid at separate times. The three cp"trictq are: (1) Tran miWon/Dintrrhution System, (2) Reverse Osmosis Process I-quipment, and (3) Reverse Osmosis Suppurt Facilities (building and storage nysfpwi ), lhn Avant,,olt , 111(1 di`,advrntrlt", ,I separate bid date, were presented and dig(IISS('d. It win the Joiilt Venture,,, Prior understanding from FmHA, a "take' -out" letter would he issued by FmHA f, r fundfnrl commitment for the full loan amount prior to r'eceivinu bids on all HIP'', roll(-ract;. Hu`, vvnr, i WIA ii not in a pmi i jon I" r4`,(1(` the t,iy( .out 1pt ft'r Hni l all bids for the threp contract, are r` r rivrd. An a result of thin action, wis the unarI III 4 deL in i(111 nI all at t(qitI nvi tit' 1;it g't.11ltl, to (r•rLit)(l, t-nnt_Url'` P!pip! of I!w for i ,( h or 1hr thr,•g` I,,Ir,lf(` , mitral t... 111i•. ►•ri l l ,(l in(, total construction cnqt to Vp definvd .end thr t,((c`-cert letter conn thrr, he rpn— frun 1111HA. After receig of the toke-cut letter tram ImHA and contract revit:: and approval by FKA, the bond anticirat:inn note, may he issued, contr,iW nwm ifn(i i nn%t.ruct ivn ran Win. r1dminlst-at It'll of thin pr( jvrt an nut l in,d n, , 1: most likely delay ultin.,te cowpletior r,1 the project. 16 Other items resolved relative to this wr•� lect were: 1 . IiiiIIA w i I 1 (.o(il orate in evor`,` way II(1',,, & 11i ill ', he rov l �'S'i (� t 1, l'i'„ en(i i neer' s r Pl. w!fln(,nda t, i ("In, ( tin i 144 L r ov i I*I aII(I `Ilii o 1 .:,!;I! i ll i . i r',! t of this project. 2. FmHA understands there may to ( h,ovie order', for redo-; i(yri M `he equipment buildinq depending on Ih(` of the ,'(t�hll +�lritrrrr selected. 3. Three soporate contracts wi i l Ki l l h(' o', arded, llowi`vor, l'id" v,'11! be received at or near the same date for the three contracts. 4. The County ha ; submi LLed to IndA, d proper ;ed r,i L(, ord in,lnr(�. Ho wk,v(`I', the rates indicated in the proponpd ordinance Indy he moditied if there are adequate connections for anwir'tization of the loin. 5. Certain sections of the transmission system which connect to franchi;e water systems may be deleted should the County not be in a position to acquire a specific franchise system. 6. A revised Pre -Application for FmHA loan and grant will he submitted for the Treasure Coast tie-in to address sewer improvements only. 7. A letter was hand delivered ot the mootinrl from FmHA which states and was further interpreted to state the test well program, land cost and hydrogeological connuitant's fees are cost reimbursable out of the project fund. GIFI-ORD SEWERAGE SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS- Fndineer's Project W505 Major points of discussion relative to this Gifford project are as iollows: 1. FmHA has given approval to award the contract haled on the original hids received and to execute change orders for the adoption of the revised plans and specifications and unit prices. 2. Due to requirements issued by the Department of Environmental Regulation, changes are required for the percolation ponds which will increase the project cost considerably. FmHA has no problem with the increased cost which will be reflected in the change order adopting the revised construction costs provided there are monies in the project fund to co"`- the inLIAWed cost. 3. The second loan for Gifford projects will he required to he closed in the near future. the Joint Venture will coordinate this requirement with the County Attorney. JAR:vs cc: Jerry Ballard Pat Lyons George Collins Tommy Thomas Tom Brown Charles Hudnell Dorthy O'Neal DEC 17 1980 1 4ohn A. Rohbins For the Joint Venture 17 sooK 45 PAGE437 DEC 171980 . . BOOK 45 PAGE 438 MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER FLETCHER THAT THE BOARD PAY ALL THE EXISTING BILLS IN REFERENCE TO THE SOUTH COUNTY WATER PROJECT, AND THEN GET OUT OF THE WATER BUSINESS IN THAT AREA. PURPOSES. COMMISSIONER WODTKE SECONDED THE MOTION FOR DISCUSSION COMMISSIONER WODTKE COMMENTED THAT THE BOARD MUST LIVE UP TO THEIR AGREEMENT, RECENTLY SIGNED WITH THE CITY, TO PROVIDE WATER IN THIS PARTICULAR AREA; HE ALSO WOULD CERTAINLY HOPE THAT THIS NEWLY FORMED COMMISSION WOULD CARRY ON WITH THIS MATTER. HE STATED THERE MAY BE SOME MATTERS THE BOARD MAY WANT TO READDRESS, BUT HE FELT THIS PROGRAM MUST BE MOVED FORWARD. COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK AGREED, COMMISSIONER FLETCHER ADVISED THAT HE HAD BEEN DOING EXTENSIVE READING REGARDING THE ISSUE OF UTILITY FRANCHISES, AND HE BELIEVED THAT WHAT IS PLANNED FOR THAT AREA IS IN CONFLICT WITH THE PHILOSOPHY TO LOWER THE DENSITY OF THIS COUNTY. COMMISSIONER FLETCHER ADDED THAT THERE ARE 5,000 ACRES OF LAND IN THIS AREA AND NATURE IS SCREAMING THAT THERE ARE TOO MANY PEOPLE LIVING ON THIS LAND; WE ARE SAYING THAT TECHNOLOGY WILL TAKE CARE OF IT - THE PROBLEM WILL BE SOLVED WITH CENTRALIZED WATER AND SEWER. COMMISSIONER FLETCHER ALSO QUESTIONED THE METHOD IN WHICH THE TAXING DISTRICT WAS SET UP. HE THEN REFERRED TO THE ANNIVERSARY OF THE BOSTON TEA PARTY, AND QUOTED THE PHRASE, "TAXATION WITHOUT REPRESENTATION," AND BELIEVED THAT THIS TAXING DISTRICT WAS SET UP WITHOUT PERMISSION. COMMISSIONER FLETCHER FELT THAT IF THE COUNTY WENT TO THE PEOPLE WITH THIS PROPOSAL, THEY WOULD SAY NO. HE THOUGHT THE BOARD WAS SAYING THAT IT KNEW WHAT WAS BEST FOR THE PEOPLE AND THEY WOULD GET WHAT THE BOARD WANTED WHETHER THEY LIKED IT OR NOT. COMMISSIONER FLETCHER EMPHASIZED THAT HE DID NOT AGREE WITH THE FORMULATION OF THE SOUTH COUNTY WATER PROJECT AND IF PEOPLE WONDER AND QUESTION HIS "NO" VOTE OVER THE NEXT FOUR YEARS, THOSE WERE HIS REASONS. COMMISSIONER BIRD THOUGHT THE BOARD WAS CHARGED WITH THE RESPONSIBILITY FOR PLANNING FOR THE FUTURE OF THE COUNTY, AND TO ACCOMMODATE THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE HERE, HE THOUGHT THAT THE SOUTH COUNTY WAS A PRIME GROWTH AREA IN THE COUNTY AND THE PEOPLE THERE HAVE TO HAVE GOOD DRINKING WATER, COMMISSIONER FLETCHER FELT THERE WERE ALTERNATIVES - HE ESTIMATED THAT EACH RESIDENT IN THE SOUTH COUNTY TAXING DISTRICT WOULD BE PAYING IN EXCESS OF $3.0OO FOR THIS SYSTEM. HE SUGGESTED THAT A UNIT COULD BE PURCHASED BY EACH RESIDENT FOR $45O THAT COULD BE PLACED UNDER THEIR SINK INSTEAD TO TREAT THE WATER. COMMISSIONER BIRD DID NOT THINK THE BOARD WANTED TO ENCOURAGE 13,000 PEOPLE TO HAVE ON-SITE WELLS IN THAT AREA, COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK WONDERED IF COMMISSIONER FLETCHER WAS SAYING THAT, IN THE FUTURE, EACH INDIVIDUAL IN THE COUNTY SHOULD HAVE UNITS UNDER THEIR SINKS ON EVERY AVAILABLE PIECE OF PROPERTY. COMMISSIONER FLETCHER STATED THAT THE DEVELOPMENT OF THIS COUNTY SHOULD BE BASED ON INDIVIDUAL CHOICES. COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK POINTED OUT THAT THE BOARD HAS ALREADY ENTERED INTO A COMMITMENT WITH THE CITY WHICH WILL SERVE THE EXISTING CUSTOMERS IN A REASONABLE MANNER. HE ADDED THAT THIS WAS GOOD PLANNING AND GOOD FOR THE ENTIRE COMMUNITY - POTABLE WATER MUST BE PROVIDED FOR OUR CITIZENS, ALSO A WAY TO DISPOSE OF THE WASTE, WILLIAM KOOLAGE, INTERESTED CITIZEN, CAME BEFORE THE BOARD AND STATED THAT THE ESSENTIAL SERVICES THE COUNTY SHOULD PROVIDE WERE SANITATION AND WATER; AND HE EXPRESSED CONCERN ABOUT THE COST, BUT REALIZED THIS WAS A NECESSITY. HE CONTINUED THAT HE CAN FORESEE THE TIME WHEN THE POLLUTION FROM THE SEPTIC TANKS WILL CAUSE WELLS TO BE A THING OF THE PAST. MR. KoOLAGE FELT THAT THE BOARD SHOULD ADDRESS THIS PROBLEM NOW, AND NOT PUT THIS OFF FOR A FUTURE DATE. HE DOES NOT LIKE TO SEE THE GROWTH IN THE COUNTY, BUT THERE IS NO WAY TO STOP IT, AND THIS PROBLEM MUST BE ADDRESSED NOW. THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION ON THE NEGATIVE MOTION AND IT WAS VOTED ON AND DEFEATED WITH A VOTE OF 1 To 4, WITH COMMIS - SIGNER FLETCHER VOTING IN FAVOR. DISCUSSION FOLLOWED ABOUT CONTINUING WITH SMITH BARNEY, AND WHETHER PROPOSALS FROM OTHER FIRMS WOULD BE ENTERTAINED. DEC 17 1980 19 BOOK 45 PAGE 439 DEC 171980 8b% 45 PA -N-440 ATTORNEY COLLINS COMMENTED THAT SMITH BARNEY MADE A PROPOSAL WHICH WAS ORIGINALLY ACCEPTED WITH SOME CONDITIONS, AND SOME CONDITIONS WERE REJECTED; NOW THAT PROPOSAL MUST BE REVIEWED BY SMITH BARNEY AND THEN ACCEPTED BY THE COUNTY. THE ATTORNEY ADDED THAT ONCE THIS PROPOSAL IS ACCEPTED, THE NECESSARY PAPERWORK CAN BE PREPARED FOR SUBMISSION TO THE BOARD FOR APPROVAL OF BOND COUNSEL. DISCUSSION FOLLOWED ABOUT BOND ANTICIPATION NOTES, AND ABOUT INTERIM FINANCING. INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATOR.THOMAS COMMENTED THAT ALL POSSIBILITIES MUST BE INVESTIGATED, AND THAT IS WHY HE FELT AN ADDITIONAL BOND ADVISOR WAS NEEDED, COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK AGREED, MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK, SECONDED BY COMMIS - SIGNER BIRD THAT MR. THOMAS BE DIRECTED TO ADVISE SMITH BARNEY TO PROCEED TO REVIEW THE PRIOR PROPOSAL, MAKE ADJUSTMENTS, APPEAR BEFORE THE BOARD FOR ACCEPTANCE OF THE PROPOSAL, AND THEN PROCEED WITH THE NECESSARY PAPERWORK FOR APPROVAL OF BOND COUNSEL BY THE BOARD. THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. IT WAS VOTED ON AND CARRIED WITH A VOTE OF 4 TO 1, WITH COMMISSIONER FLETCHER VOTING IN OPPOSITION. AUTHORIZATION FOR ADDITIONAL EXPENSES RE 201 FACILITY PLAN THE BOARD NEXT REVIEWED THE FOLLOWING PROPOSAL: SVERDRUP & PARCEL AND ASSOCIATES, INC. AND BEINDORF AND ASSOCIATES, INC. (A JOINT VENTURE) Project No. November 24, 1980 Mr. Patrick B. Lyons, Chairman Board of County Commissioners Indian River County County Courthouse Vero Beach, Florida 32960 Subject: Indian River County 201 Facility Plan Dear Mr. Lyons: 6383C As was discussed with you by Mr. John Robbins at the Commission meet- ing on November 19, 1980, we are pleased to submit the following proposal for your consideration. We have continued our work on the Facility Plan beyond the work authorized by the Commission on June 4, 1980 and have incurred the following additional expenses: Technical Personnel $ 2,691.11 Direct Costs 287.70 Total $ 2,978.81 We request payment for these costs and will furnish you with a de- tailed breakdown as Invoice No. 3 upon your approval of this proposal. We will prepare an application to the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency for a Step 2 (Design) grant for a fee not to exceed $3,700.00. As a minimum the application will consist of the following items: 1. Transmittal letter from the County to Florida Department of Environmental Regulation. 2. Application for Federal Assistance, EPA Form 5700-32, (16 pages) including Schedule of Pay- ment and Project Time Schedule. 3. Assurance of Compliance, EPA Forms 4700-1 and 4700-4 by the County and the following Cities and Towns: Vero Beach, Feilsmere, Sebastian, Indian River Shores and Orchid. 4. Engineering Agreement between the County and the Joint Venture. 5. Cost or Price Summary Format for Subagreements under U.S. EPA Grants, EPA Form 5700-41 (5 pages). 6. Resolution by the County to proceed with Step 2 (Design). Also to be included by the County are: (a) Evidence of intent to develop a user charge system (b) Certified statement of intent to comply with Uniform Relocation and Land Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 7. Reference to Clearinghouse approvals. ��ox 45, Pace 441 DEC 171980: 21 I Lk DEC 171980 BOOK 8. Draft or actual copy of Sewer Use Ordinance by the County. 9. Service Agreements between the County and Cities and Towns. 10. Commitment by the County to have a Value Engineer- ing study performed. 11. Cost estimates and/or subcontracts for related engineering services to include Value Engineering, soils testing and surveys. 45 PACE 442 We will continue to furnish services to the County in connection with the Facility Plan on a cost reimbursable basis in accordance with our contract. We will advise the County on a bi-weekly basis of the ap- proximate amount of costs incurred during the previous two weeks, if this proposed method of service is agreeable. We look forward to your favorable approval of this proposal. Sincerely, James C. Jo &, Jr. For the Joint Venture DISCUSSION FOLLOWED ABOUT THE THIRD PARAGRAPH WHICH REFERS TO A DETAILED BREAKDOWN OF COSTS. MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER BIRD, SECONDED BY COMMIS - SIGNER WODTKE, FOR THE BOARD TO AUTHORIZE THE ADDITIONAL EXPENSES IN THE AMOUNT OF $2,978.81, BASED UPON CLARIFICATION OF THE EXPENSES. THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. IT WAS VOTED ON AND CARRIED WITH A VOTE OF 4 TO 1, WITH COMMISSIONER FLETCHER VOTING IN OPPOSITION, BU_THORIZATION TO PROCEED WITH THE STEP 2 APPLICATION OF THE 201 PLAN MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, SECONDED BY COMMIS- SIONER BIRD, THAT THE BOARD CONTINUE WITH THE STEP 2 APPLICATION OF THE 201 PLAN. DISCUSSION ENSUED. THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. IT WAS VOTED ON AND CARRIED WITH A VOTE OF 4 TO 1, WITH COMMISSIONER FLETCHER VOTING IN OPPOSITION, FINANCE COMMITTEE LIAISON CHAIRMAN LYONS REQUESTED THAT COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK BE APPOINTED AS CHAIRMAN OF THE FINANCE COMMITTEE FOR THE COUNTY. HE ADDED THAT COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK COULD MEET WITH FINANCE DIRECTOR BARTON AND ADMINISTRATOR NELSON AND BE THE WATCH DOG FOR THE FUNDING IN THE COUNTY AND BE AWARE OF HOW ITEMS ARE FINANCED. THE CHAIRMAN NOTED THAT COMMISSIONER Loy PREVIOUSLY HANDLED THAT JOB. COMMISSIONER WODTKE COMMENTED THAT THREE YEARS AGO, COMMIS- SIONER LOY HEADED THE BUDGET FINANCE COMMITTEE AT A TIME WHEN IT WAS IN A TRANSITIONAL PERIOD BEFORE FINANCE DIRECTOR BARTON CAME TO WORK WITH THE COUNTY.. HE CONTINUED THAT THE INTENT OF THAT COMMITTEE WAS TO HAVE ONE OR TWO LAY INDIVIDUALS, WITH PROFESSIONAL ABILITY, SIT IN FOR ASSISTANCE, BUT IT NEVER REALLY DEVELOPED INTO A FULL COMMITTEE. DISCUSSION FOLLOWED AND IT WAS DETERMINED THAT THE BOARD WOULD LIKE TO HAVE A POINT OF COORDINATION WITH THE FINANCE DIRECTOR, AND COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK COULD LOOK INTO THIS MATTER, BE THE LIAISON, AND MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS. COMMISSIONER BIRD SUGGESTED HAVING A COMMITTEE OF RETIRED PEOPLE, WITH FINANCIAL BACKGROUND AND EXPERTISE, WHO COULD DONATE THEIR SERVICES. HE ADDED THAT THE BOARD WILL BE DEALING IN MATTERS IN THE FUTURE WHERE HE WOULD HAVE TO RELY ON SOMEONE IS OPINION WHO IS KNOWLEDGEABLE IN CERTAIN MATTERS. COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK STATED THAT THE CITY HAS A SUCCESSFUL FINANCE COMMITTEE WHICH HAS HAD GOOD INPUT. HE ADDED THAT HE WOULD LIKE TO WORK WITH MR. BARTON AND MR. NELSON, AND REVIEW SOME MATTERS BEFORE THEY ARE PRESENTED TO THE BOARD. COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK ALSO AGREED THAT LOCAL RESIDENTS SHOULD BE INCLUDED IF THEY CARE TO OFFER THEIR EXPERTISE. DEC 171980 23 mox 45 pma44 DEC 17 19 80 8009 THE BOARD NEXT REVIEWED THE FOLLOWING MEMORANDUM: MEMO TO: Neil Nelson, Administrator FROM: George Liner, Utilities Director SUBJECT: Status of Gifford Sewage Plant Progress DATE: December 17, 1980 The following was learned in discussing project with Engineer: 45 PACE 444 DER granted the schedule extension to March 15, 1981 for the completion of the plant and its certification. At the same time DER imposed a change in the percolation pond construction which amounts to strippinq out the pond base and replacing it with "approved" fill. This requirement amounts to added costs for the contractors work of $150,000 to $200,000 not counting the fill which may be another $150,000. The engineer is looking into alternative ways of accomplishing the job without this excessive expense. At the same time as DER added the extensive change in the pond work, they added the threat that there will be fines imposed on the County if the plant is not ready by March 15. This past week the remainder of the DER permits arrived which allows the project to proceed. Other than the added pond work, the negotiations with the contractor were in line with anticipated costs. GL/kh cc: file George Line'r, Utilities Director DISCUSSION FOLLOWED ABOUT THE ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS THAT THE DER HAS IMPOSED IN THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE PERCOLATION POND. COMMISSIONER FLETCHER COMPLAINED THAT WHEN YOU SPEND SOME— BODY ELSE IS MONEY, THEY CAN TELL YOU HOW TO SPEND IT; HE ALSO EXPRESSED CONCERN ABOUT THE PROJECT COSTING MORE AND MORE MONEY. UTILITIES DIRECTOR LINER COMMENTED THAT IT WAS NOT A QUESTION SO MUCH AS TO THE DEPTH OF THE POND, BUT THE WAY IT HAS TO BE CONSTRUCTED — THE POND WOULD ABSORB THE PLANTS EFFLUENT. HE ADDED THAT THE ENGINEERS ARE TRYING TO WORK OUT SOME SORT OF ALTERNATE METHOD. MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, SECONDED BY COMMIS- SIONER SCURLOCK TO APPROVE OUT -OF -COUNTY TRAVEL TO ENABLE CHAIRMAN LYONS, OR ANOTHER PERSON, TO MEET WITH THE DER, THE ENGINEERS AND CONSULTANTS AND TRY TO RESOLVE THIS MATTER. CHAIRMAN LYONS WAS NOT SURE IF HE WOULD BE ABLE TO ATTEND THIS MEETING. THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. IT WAS VOTED ON AND CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. LENGTHY DISCUSSION FOLLOWED CONCERNING THE HISTORY OF THE SEWAGE PLANT LAND. ADMINISTRATOR NELSON STRESSED THAT THE COUNTY IS UNDER THREAT FROM THE DER TO GET A SEWER PLANT IN AND THE ARRANGEMENTS MUST BE MADE BY THE END OF THE YEAR. CHAIRMAN LYONS STATED THAT, FOR THE RECORD, THE BOARD SHOULD UNDERSTAND THAT THE SEWAGE PLANT MAY COST MORE THAN WAS ORIGINALLY INDICATED. RELEASE OF EASEMENTS REQUESTED BY LUCIEN MICHAUD - RESOLUTION 80-133 SENIOR PLANNER MARSH APPROACHED THE BOARD AND REVIEWED THE FOLLOWING MEMORANDUM: -December 2, 1980 MEMO T0: Neil Nehson, County Administrator .FROM: DavidMarsh,'Senior Planner SUBJECT: Easement'Release Request This request for the release of those side lot easements lying between lots.7,.8 and 9, Block G, Oslo Park, Unit 3 has been reviewed by the following agencies: "-`Southern Bell Telephone Co. - Florida Power & Light R.0.W. Department Utilities Department with no objectionable responses .received. A site visit showed that drainage and utilities can be adequately :,.handled by the front and rear lot line easement. Combined with the :permanent retention of the side lot easement lying between lots G 'and 7 in said block for cross drainage purposes, staff can recommend ;approval. �.. V . DEC 17 1980 25 4'a I'AIE445 PF - DEC 17 1980 45 PAGF.446 ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER FLETCHER, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER BIRD, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTED RESOLUTION N0. 80-133 APPROVING RELEASE OF EASEMENTS LYING BETWEEN LOTS 7, 8 AND 9, BLOCK G, OSLO PARK UNIT 3, AS REQUESTED BY LUCIEN MICHAUD, AND AUTHORIZED THE SIGNATURE OF THE CHAIRMAN. RESOLUTION NO. 80-133 WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, have been requested to release the side lot line easements lying between Lots 7, 8 and 9, Block G, Oslo Park, Unit 3, according to the Plat of same recorded in Plat Book 4, page 19, of the Public Records of Indian River County, Florida; and WHEREAS, said lot line easements were dedicated on the Plat of Oslo Park, Unit 3 for public utility purposes; and WHEREAS, the request for such release of easement has been submitted in proper form; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that the following lot line easements in Oslo Park, Unit 3, shall be released, abandoned and vacated as follows: Those side lot easements lying between Lots 7, 8 and 9, Block G, according to the Plat of the same filed in the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Indian River County, Florida, in Plat Book 4, at page 19. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners and the Clerk of the Circuit Court be and they hereby are authorized and directed to execute a release of said lot line easements herein- above referred to in form proper for recording and placing in the Public Records of Indian River County, Florida. This 17th day of December , 1980. Attest: Freda Wright, Clerk / BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA 1 R11FASE OF FASFIMENT This Release of Easement, executed this 17th day of _December___ _, 1980, by the BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, first party; to Lucien J. arrd Stephanie B. Michaud, whose mailing address is 3705 20th Street, Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida, second party: WITNESSETH: That the said party of the first part for and in consideration'of the sum of One Dollar ($1.00) and other good and valuable consideration in hand paid by the said second party, does hereby remise, release, abandon, and quit claim unto the said second party forever, all the right, title, interest, claim and demand which the said first party has in and to the following described easement, lying on land situate in the County of Indian River County, State of Florida, to -wit: Those side lot easements lying between Lots 7, 8 and 9, Block G, - Oslo Park, Unit 3, a subdivision as recorded in Plat Book 4, page 19, public records of Indian River County, Florida. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the same with all and singular the appurtenances thereunto belonging or in anywise appertaining and all estate, right, title, interest, equity and claim whatsoever of the said first party either in law or equity to the only proper use, benefit and behoof of the said second party forever. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the said first party has signed and sealed these presents by the parties so authorized by the law the day and year first above written. Signed, sealed and delivered in the presence of: DEC 171990 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA r By: t 'ck B. Lyons, Chair Pan Attest: Freda Wright, Clerk POOH. 45 Fa;E 447 �. Fr - DEC 17 1990 STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER 600K45 PAGE 448 I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this day before me an officer duly authorized in the State and County aforesaid to take acknowledgements personally appeared, PATRICK B. LYONS, as Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County,'a political subdivision of the State of Florida, and FREDA WRIGHT, as Clerk of the Circuit Court, to me known to be the persons duly authorized by said County to execute the foregoing instrument and they acknowledged before me that they executed the same for and on behalf of the said political subdivision. WITNESS my hany and State last aforesaid d a seal in the Count this day of 1980. (Notary Seal) �/4 - - - .- - ,�. Notary P lic, State o Flo a at Large My conmrission expires: P47`: nC�.tD� AT LAik'f RELEASE OF EASEMENTS REQUESTED BY ROBERT B. AND MARCIA W. BISHOP — RESOLUTION 80-134 SENIOR PLANNER MARSH APPROACHED THE BOARD AND REVIEWED THE FOLLOWING MEMORANDUM: December 1, 1980 MEMO TO: Neil Nelson, County..Administrator FROM: DaVi`d Mairsh,`Senior Planner SUBJECT: Easement Release This request for the ^re•lease`of'4thsse`;side'lof easements lying between lots -10 and 11, Black D', .Oslo,*Park, Unit 8 has been reviewed favorably. by tW,,fol l 0wi ng 4 Vinci Florida P`n aer .. and Ag h h ."Southern :Bel1 TeIeAhone . Co. -.: R.0.W1 Department Utilities.Dep artment; A written response was not received by.Florida Power. & Light; however, a follow up indicated thatthere were no objections to the release. Based on the responses and staff analysis, it is recommended that the easement be released as the existing swale on the south lot line currently provides sufficient drainage., Additional area for drainage and or utilities could be provided on the rear lot line easement. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BIRD, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTED RESOLUTION No. 80-134 APPROVING THE RELEASE OF EASEMENTS LYING BETWEEN LOTS 10 AND 11, BLOCK D, OSLO PARK UNIT 3, AS REQUESTED BY ROBERT B. AND MARCIA W. BISHOP, AND AUTHORIZED THE SIGNATURE OF THE CHAIRMAN. DEC 171980 29 8.60K 45 FavE'449 r DEC 17 1980 sooX -.5 PAGE 45® RESOLUTION NO. 8n-134 WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, have been requested to release the side lot line easements lying between Lots 10 and 11, Block D, Oslo Park, Unit 3, according to the Plat of same recorded in Plat Book 4, page 19, of the Public Records of Indian River County, Florida; and WHEREAS, said lot line easements were dedicated on the Plat of Oslo Park, Unit 3 for public utility purposes; and WHEREAS, the request for such release of easement has been submitted in proper form; NOW,- THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that the following lot line easements in Oslo Park, Unit 3, shall be released, abandoned and vacated as follows: Those side lot easements lying between Lots 10 and 11, Block D according to the Plat of the same filed in the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Indian River County, Florida, in Plat Book 4, at page 19. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners and the Clerk of the Circuit Court be and they hereby are authorized and directed to execute a release of said lot line easements herein- above referred to in form proper for recording and placing in the Public Records of Indian River County, Florida. This 17th day of December , 1980. Attest: � 1 -C - Freda Wright, Clerk�J BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA BE trick B. Lyons, Chairman _I RELEASE OF EASEMENT This Release of Easement, executed this 17th day of December , 1980, by the BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, first party; to Robert B. and Marcia W. Bishop, whose mailing address is 1425 22nd Avenue, Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida, second party: WITNESSETH: That the said party of the first part for and in consideration of the sum of One Dollar ($1.00) and other good and valuable consideration in hand paid by the said second party, does hereby remise, release, abandon, and quit claim unto the said second party forever, all the right, title, interest, claim and demand which the said first party has in and to the following described easement, lying on land situate in the County of Indian River County, State of Florida, to -wit: Those side lot easements lying between Lots 10 and 11, Block D, Oslo. Park, Unit 3, a subdivision as recorded in Plat Book 4, page 19, public records of Indian River County, Florida. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the same with all and singular the appurtenances thereunto belonging or in anywise.appertaining and all estate, right, title, interest, equity and claim whatsoever of the said first party either in law or equity to the only proper use,,benefit and behoof of the said second party forever. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the said first party has signed and sealed these presents by the parties so authorized by the law the day and year first above written. Signed, sealed and delivered in the presence of: rjjL JAI./ BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA By: Attest: Freda Wright, Clerk f EC 1719 0 oolc. PAGE 51 Q .� DEC 171980 STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER BOOK - 45 PAGE 52 I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this day before me an officer duly authorized in the State and County aforesaid to take acknowledgements personally appeared, PATRICK B. LYONS, as Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, and FREDA WRIGHT, as Clerk of the Circuit Court, to me known to be the persons duly authorized by said County to execute the foregoing instrument and they acknowledged before me that they executed the same for and on behalf of the said political subdivision. WITNESS my hand and seal in the County and State last aforesaid this . /7-'�4day of 1980. (Notary Seal) ��- � ->. "i�, ��� Notary Publ' , State of Florid t Large Ply cominissi n expires: WOi sk1 FU*111C STATE OF FLORIDA AT LARCH M"t C -c-, ,-:vs [>rIRE5 _$L'CY 8 IG%T INS. V? -� `te R17EPS PUBLIC HEARING — SET—BACKS ON EACH SIDE OF STATE ROAD 60 ORDINANCE N0. 80-40 THE HOUR OF 9:30 O'CLOCK A.M. HAVING PASSED, THE DEPUTY CLERK READ THE FOLLOWING NOTICE WITH PROOF OF PUBLICATION ATTACHED, TO—WIT: Published Meekly Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida COUNTY OF INDIAN RIMER: STATE OF FLORIDA Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a weekly newspaper published at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being a - in the matter of in the Court, was pub - fished in said newspaper in the issues of &I Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, and that the said newspaper has heretofore been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, weekly and has been entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida for a period of one year next preceeding the first publication of the attached copy of adver- tisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this adver- tisement for publication in the said newspaper. Sworn to and subscribed bef, me is day of AlbilA.D. (SEAL) W.Business Manager) t�a ;� � _, _Zj (Clerk of the Circuit Court, liadian River County, Florida) 0 NOTICE NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN thatthe Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, will hold a public hearing on December 17, 1980 at 9:30 A.M..in the City Council Chambers in the Vero Beach City Hall i to consider the adoption of an 1 Ordinance relating to set backs on each side of State Road 60 from the West boundary of the I main canal to the Interstate 1-95 Interchange, providing for building construction set backs of at least 75 feet from the right-of-way line of State Road 60; providing for an extension of said set backs West of the Interstate 1-95 In- terchange; providing penalties and providing for. an effective date. -:<­;� -,r* - I Board Of County Commissioners of -- Indian River County, Florida By: -s-Patrick B. Lyons Chairman i Nov. 26,1900. THE CHAIRMAN ASKED IF THERE WAS ANYONE PRESENT WHO WISHED TO BE HEARD. THERE WERE NONE, ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BIRD, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY CLOSED THE. PUBLIC HEARING. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BIRD, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTED ORDINANCE NO. 80-40 RELATING TO SETBACKS ON EACH SIDE OF STATE ROAD 60. DEC 171980 33 BOOK I A45'-Pui 453 DEC 17 1980 80 - 45 PAGE 454 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 80-40 AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO SET BACKS ON EACH SIDE OF STATE ROAD 60 FROM THE WEST BOUNDARY OF THE MAIN CANAL TO INTERSTATE 95 INTERCHANGE: PROVIDING FOR BUILDING CONSTRUCTION SET BACKS OF AT LEAST SEVENTY- FIVE (75') FEET FROM.THE RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF STATE ROAD 60; PROVIDING FOR PENALTIES: AND PRO- VIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County recognizes that the opening of Interstate 95 into St. Lucie County will tend to attract a corridor of auto -oriented enterprises along State Road 60 and this movement should be carefully regulated in order to protect the locality's main traffic accessway to Interstate 95 to insure sound stablized economic growth; and WHEREAS, Indian River County is attempting to comply with the State Comprehensive Land Use Statutes for the purposes of insuring orderly development within Indian River County; and WHEREAS, a rapid development of property on either side of State Road 60 would frustrate the purposes of orderly planned growth within the County; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, That: Section 1. There is hereby established a seventy-five (75') foot building construction set back on all real property fronting on State Road 60 from the West boundary line of the Main Canal to the Interstate 95 Interchange. The required set back shall be measured from the road right of way line. Section 2. Anyone who violates this Ordinance shall, upon conviction, be punished by a fine not exceeding Five Hundred Dollars ($500.00) or by imprisonment in the County Jail not exceeding sixty (60) days or by both fine and imprisonment. Each day in violation shall constitute a separate offence. The Board of County Commissioners may bring suit to restrain, enjoin or other- wise prevent violation of this Ordinance in the Circuit Court of Indian River County, Florida. r r Section 3. This Ordinance shall take effect on and be in effect for a period of one (1) year. All other Ordinances and Amendments thereto that are in conflict with this Ordinance are hereby repealed. Adopted December 17, 1980 This Ordinance shall take effect December 22, 1980. DEC 17 1980 BOOK FACE 455 I DEC 17 19 80 Rno 45 PAGE 45 6 PUBLIC HEARING — AMENDING ORDINANCE 71-3, SECTION 19, C -1A MINI—WAREHOUSES AS A SPECIAL EXCEPTION — REFERRED TO PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION THE HOUR OF IO:OO O'CLOCK A.M. HAVING PASSED, THE DEPUTY CLERK READ THE FOLLOWING NOTICE WITH PROOF OF PUBLICATION ATTACHED, TO—WIT: n VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL Published Weekly Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER: STATE OF FLORIDA Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a weekly newspaper published at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being a t in the matter of 7/- 3. in the Court, was pub- lished in said newspaper in the issues of IF MO Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, and that the said newspaper has heretofore been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, weekly and has been entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida for a period of one year next preceeding the first publication of the attached copy of adver- tisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this adver- tisement for publication in the said newspaper. Sworn to and subscribed before rW this , % day of lilt A.D. V- 1 ` Business Manager) (Clerk of the Circuit Court, India River County, Florida) (SEAL) NOTICE r N, NOTICE Is HEREBY GIVEN thatthe Board of County Commissioners of Indian River ._ County, Florida, will hold a public hearing on December .17, 1980, at 10:00 A.M. in the City Council Chambers in the Vero Beach City Wall;. to consider the adoption of an Ordinance amending Indian River C:ounty..e Ordinance,; No. 71-3, Section 19 C 1/t,,:. Restricted `Commercial District, subsecflon - (a), as amended, by providing for' Minf Warehouses as a special exception within the: said C -IA Restricted Commercial District..' Board of, County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida By: -s -Willard W. Siebert Jr., Chairman Nov. 18, 1980. - PLANNING DIRECTOR REVER EXPLAINED THAT THIS REQUEST HAD NOT BEEN BROUGHT TO THE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION FOR DISCUSSION, AND HE FELT THAT IT WOULD BE IN ORDER TO DO S0, DISCUSSION FOLLOWED ABOUT PROCEDURE, AND IT WAS DETERMINED THE BOARD INITIATED AMENDING THIS ORDINANCE SEVERAL MONTHS AGO. THE CHAIRMAN ASKED IF THERE WAS ANYONE PRESENT WHO WISHED TO BE HEARD. THERE WERE NONE. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER FLETCHER, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING1 J ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER FLETCHER, SECONDED BY COMMIS- SIONER BIRD, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY REFERRED THIS MATTER TO THE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION FOR THEIR REVIEW. ARTHRITIS ASSOCIATION - PRESENTATION BY ELINOR CARSON, PRESIDENT PRESIDENT ELINOR CARSON, OF THE ARTHRITIS ASSOCIATION, CAME BEFORE THE BOARD AND ADVISED THEM OF THIS NEW AGENCY IN INDIAN RIVER COUNTY. SHE CONTINUED THAT THREE YEARS AGO THE ARTHRITIS ASSOCIATION WAS FORMED BY DONNA MITCHELL AND HAS NOW GROWN - THEY HAVE VOLUNTEER OFFICE HELP AND VOLUNTEER DRIVERS. MS. CARSON THEN READ FROM A PAMPHLET ABOUT WHAT THEIR AGENCY PROVIDES IN THE WAY OF SERVICES. SHE ADVISED THAT THEY HAVE OVER %O CLIENTS WHO PARTICIPATE. MS. CARSON COMMENTED THAT THEIR AGENCY ACCEPTS MEMORIALS, AND THEY HAVE FUND RAISING PROJECTS. SHE THEN ASKED FOR THE SUPPORT OF THE BOARD TO GIVE THEIR AGENCY PUBLICITY. CHAIRMAN LYONS THANKED MS. CARSON FOR HER PRESENTATION AND COMMENTED THAT THE VOLUNTEERS CERTAINLY HAVE UNDERTAKEN AN AMBITIOUS PROGRAM. 1981 HOLIDAY SCHEDULE THE BOARD NEXT.REVIEWED THE FOLLOWING HOLIDAY SCHEDULE: DEC 171980 Boos 45 `PA 458 We, the undersigned elected officials of INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, Florida designate the following Holidays for the closing of our respective offices for the year 1981. HOLIDAY 1. New Years Day 2. i 3. Good Friday 4. Memorial Day 5. Independence Day 6. Labor Day 7.. Veteran's Day 8. Thanksgiving Day 9. 10. Christmas 11. New Years Day 1981 For Circuit Court Offices For County Court Office For Tax Collector's Office I For Clerk of Circuit Court Offices For Supervisor`of Election Office For Property Appraiser's Office For Sheriff's Office Dates Courthouse Closed Thursday, January 1 Friday, January 2• Friday, April 17 Monday, May 25 Friday, July 3 Monday, September 7 Wednesday, November 11 Thursday, November 26 Friday, November 27 Thursday, December 24 Friday, December 25 COMMISSIONER WODTKE COMMENTED THAT THE PROCESS FOR PROPOSING A HOLIDAY SCHEDULE HAS BEEN REVERSED. HE EXPLAINED THAT IN THE PAST THE BOARD HAD CIRCULATED TO THE CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS A HOLIDAY SCHEDULE, AND NOW THE BOARD IS GETTING A PROPOSAL FROM THE CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS. LENGTHY DISCUSSION FOLLOWED, AND IT WAS DETERMINED THAT IT WOULD BE A GOOD IDEA TO DETERMINE WHAT THE COST It PER HOLIDAY `S WOULD BE, IN THE FUTURE, AS FAR AS SALARIES ARE CONCERNED. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER FLETCHER, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED THE 1981 HOLIDAY SCHEDULE, AND DELETED ITEM 2, WHICH IS FRIDAY, JANUARY 2. r CHAIRMAN LYONS STATED THAT IN A FEW MINUTES HE WOULD HAVE TO LEAVE THE MEETING, AND HE HANDED THE GAVEL TO VICE CHAIRMAN WODTKE AT 11:30 O'CLOCK A.M. THE CHAIRMAN REPORTED THAT HE WOULD RETURN TO THE MEETING AT 1:30 THIS AFTERNOON, CHANGE ORDER #6 COUNTY COURTHOUSE RENOVATION CONSTRUCTION PROJECT REPRESENTATIVE KONTOULAS APPROACHED THE BOARD AND RECOMMENDED THAT CHANGE ORDER #6 ON THE COURTHOUSE, REGARDING EXTENSION OF TIME OF THE CONTRACT, BE APPROVED, HE THEN ADVISED THE BOARD THAT THE WORK ON THE COURTHOUSE IS MOVING ALONG, AND HE ASSUMES THAT THE ADMINISTRATION BUILDING WILL BE COMPLETED BY JULY, 1981, MR, KONTOULAS COMMENTED THAT THE PROPERTY. AP.PRAI.SER AND TAX COLLECTOR CAN BE MOVED OUT OF THE ANNEX WHEN THE ADMINISTRATION BUILDING IS FINISHED - THEN REINHOLD CONSTRUCTION WILL HAVE ACCESS TO THE ANNEX AND FINISH THE RENOVATION BY OCTOBER 31, 1981, HE REITERATED THAT, AS IT STANDS NOW, THE COUNTY IS ASSUMING THAT THEY WILL OCCUPY THE ADMINISTRATION BUILDING ON JULY 1, 1981, ADMINISTRATOR NELSON REPORTED THAT THE TAX COLLECTOR AND THE PROPERTY APPRAISER CANNOT FUNCTION WITH THE CONSTRUCTION GOING ON - THE ADMINISTRATION BUILDING WILL HAVE TO BE COMPLETED FIRST, THEN MOVE THE TAX COLLECTOR AND PROPERTY APPRAISER OUT OF THE ANNEX, AND TURN THE ANNEX OVER TO THE CONTRACTOR, MR, NELSON NOTED THAT THERE ARE TWO SEPARATE CONTRACTS; ONE FOR THE COURTHOUSE AND ONE FOR THE ADMINISTRATION BUILDING, THE ADMINISTRATOR KNEW THAT IT WOULD TAKE A LONGER TIME TO FINISH THE WORK ON THE ADMINISTRATION BUILDING, MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER FLETCHER, SECONDED BY COM- MISSIONER BIRD, THAT THE BOARD ACCEPT CHANGE ORDER #6, AND AUTHORIZE THE SIGNATURE OF THE VICE CHAIRMAN, DISCUSSION FOLLOWED, THE VICE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION, IT WAS VOTED ON AND CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY, DEC 17 1980 39 Box 45 FaoF 459 DEC 171980 e pk 45 PA 460 DISCUSSION FOLLOWED ABOUT THE CHANGE ORDER REVIEW PROCESS, AS WELL AS THE PER DIEM CHARGES AS THEY APPEAR IN THE PROPOSALS. IT APPEARS THERE WAS A CLERICAL ERROR, AND THE PER DIEM CHARGES SHOULD READ $300 A DAY FOR THE COURTHOUSE AS WELL AS FOR THE ADMI'NISTRAITION BUILDING. VICE CHAIRMAN WODTKE SUGGESTED THAT THE BOARD WATCH THE TIME SCHEDULE, AND TOUCH BASE WITH MR. KONTOULAS AND THE ADMINISTRATOR IN ORDER TO KEEP AWARE OF THE SITUATION. CLERK. CHANGE ORDER #6 WILL BE KEPT ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS THEREUPON RECESSED AND RECONVENED AT 11:45 O'CLOCK A.M. ACTING AS THE DISTRICT BOARD OF FIRE COMMISSIONERS OF THE NORTH INDIAN RIVER COUNTY FIRE DISTRICT. MINUTES OF THAT MEETING WILL BE PREPARED SEPARATELY. THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS THEREUPON RECESSED AT 12:15 O'CLOCK P.M. AND RECONVENED AT 1:45 O'CLOCK P.M. WITH THE SAME MEMBERS PRESENT. DEPUTY CLERK VIRGINIA HARGREAVES TOOK OVER FROM DEPUTY CLERK JANICE CALDWELL FOR THE REMAINDER OF THE MEETING. DISCUSSION RE STATUS OF 6TH AVENUE AND STH STREET PROPOSAL CHAIRMAN LYONS WENT INTO THE HISTORY OF THE COUNTY'S CONCERN ABOUT THE DANGERS OF THE DIAGONAL INTERSECTION OF 6TH AVENUE AND U.S. #1, WHICH CONCERN HAS INTENSIFIED AS THAT AREA HAS CONTINUED TO BUILD UP AND GENERATE ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC. HE REPORTED THAT WE HAVE HAD FOR SOME TIME PERMISSION TO PUT A TRAFFIC LIGHT ON U.S. #1 AT STH STREET, AND THE PREVIOUS BOARD TOOK FORMAL ACTION TO HAVE THE 6TH AVENUE ENTRANCE TO U.S. #1 CHANGED TO STH STREET AND EFFECTIVELY BARRICADE THE 6TH AVENUE—U.S. #1 INTERSECTION. IT WAS ALSO INDICATED THAT WE WOULD 'PROCEED WITH THE DESIGN AND OPENING UP OF STH STREET. CHAIRMAN LYONS COMMENTED THAT THE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION HAS BEEN WORKING ON THE ASSUMPTION THAT THIS INTERSECTION WILL BE CLOSED, AND SITE PLANS HAVE BEEN APPROVED ON THAT BASIS. HE DID NOT BELIEVE WE HAVE MOVED FORWARD ON THE DESIGN AND OPENING UP OF 8TH STREET AND FELT THIS IS SOMETHING THAT COULD BE HANDLED BY THE NEW COUNTY ENGINEER WHO WILL BE JOINING THE COUNTY STAFF IN JANUARY, PLANNING DIRECTOR REVER NOTED THAT THEY NEED TO INCLUDE THIS IN THE PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN SINCE IT WILL BE A COLLECTOR ROAD EAST AND WEST. DISCUSSION FOLLOWED IN REGARD TO THE POSSIBILITY OF KEEPING THE NORTH BOUND LANE OPEN COMING ONTO 6TH AVENUE OFF OF U.S. #1 AND HAVING A ONE WAY STREET. THE PLANNING DIRECTOR AGREED THEIR PLANS. CAN BE ADJUSTED AT THIS POINT. COMMISSIONER FLETCHER ASKED IF THIS PORTION OF 6TH AVENUE IS TO BE ABANDONED OR CLOSED AND WAS INFORMED THAT IT WOULD BE CLOSED, NOT ABANDONED. CHAIRMAN LYONS EMPHASIZED THE NEED TO PROCEED ON THE DESIGN OF STH STREET AND GET THIS SETTLED SO THAT PEOPLE WILL NOT BE LEFT IN A STATE OF LIMBO. MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER BIRD, TO AUTHORIZE THE ADMINISTRATORS STAFF TO PROCEED WITH THE DESIGN OF 8TH STREET THROUGH TO U.S. #1 AND WITH THE PROCURE- MENT OF THE NECESSARY RIGHT-OF-WAY. COMMISSIONER FLETCHER WISHED TO HAVE A CHANGE TO REVIEW THE PROJECT AND THE PLANS AND ASKED IF TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE. COMMISSIONERS BIRD AND SCURLOCK BOTH STATED THAT THEY WERE FAMILIAR WITH THE INTERSECTION AND ITS HAZARDS AND THE ON-GOING EFFORTS TO OVERCOME THE DANGERS, WHICH HAVE BEEN GOING ON FOR A CONSIDERABLE LENGTH OF TIME; THEY AGREED THAT TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE BEFORE SOMEONE IS KILLED AT THIS LOCATION. CHAIRMAN LYONS NOTED THAT MR. FLETCHER CAN, OF COURSE, REVIEW THIS PROJECT AND WE CAN CONSIDER ANY ALTERNATIVES HE MAY PRESENT, BUT THE CHAIRMAN EMPHASIZED THAT THIS HAS BEEN STUDIED FOR A LONG TIME. COMMISSIONER FLETCHER ASKED PERMISSION FOR AN AFFECTED PROPERTY OWNER TO ADDRESS THE BOARD. MRS. OTA BOYLES, OWNER OF THE PROPERTY ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF 6TH AVENUE AND U.S. #1, CAME BEFORE THE BOARD AND REVIEWED IN DETAIL HER CLAIM THAT THE COUNTY HAS ENCROACHED ON HER PROPERTY, THEREBY CAUSING HER MANY PROBLEMS. DEC 17 1980 6z 41 Sfllf 45 mo4,0, DEC 171980 nox -45 pAcE 46 - ATTORNEY COLLINS INFORMED THE BOARD THAT MRS. BOYLES HAS, ON AT LEAST TWO OCCASIONS THAT HE WAS AWARE OF, REPORTED THIS ALLEGED ENCROACHMENT TO THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATORS OFFICE, AND HE BELIEVED MR. NELSON WAS GOING TO DISCUSS WITH THE BOARD AT THE NEXT MEETING THE STEPS HE WAS GOING TO FOLLOW TO DETERMINE WHETHER THE ALLEGED PROBLEM DOES, IN FACT, EXIST. _ ADMINISTRATOR NELSON FELT THIS HAS BEEN AN ALLEGATION MADE BY MRS. BOYLES FOR A GOOD NUMBER OF YEARS, AND HE BELIEVED WE SHOULD COMPLETELY RESEARCH IT AND SEE EXACTLY WHERE WE STAND, CHAIRMAN LYONS COMMENTED THAT THE ACTION PROPOSED BY THE COMMISSION WAS TO MAKE AN ENTRANCE TO U.S. #1 AT 8TH STREET AND TO ELIMINATE THE ACCESS FROM 6TH AVENUE TO U.S. #1 GOING SOUTHBOUND. HE ASKED IF THAT IS CONTRARY TO WHAT MRS. BOYLES WOULD WANT. MRS. BOYLES STATED THAT THE ROAD IS WHERE THE DRAINFIELD FOR HER SEPTIC TANK HAS TO BE AND AS LONG AS THE ROAD IS THERE, SHE CAN T HAVE A SEPTIC TANK DRAINFIELD. CHAIRMAN LYONS BELIEVED THERE ARE TWO PROBLEMS - MRS. BOYLES BELIEVES THE COUNTY HAS ENCROACHED ON HER PROPERTY, AND THAT IS WHAT WE WOULD BE TRYING TO DETERMINE. SECONDLY, WE ARE TODAY TRYING TO ACT ON THE MATTER OF EFFECTIVELY CLOSING 6TH AVENUE AT U.S. #1, WHICH HE FELT WOULD BE TO MRS. BOYLES' ADVANTAGE. MRS. BOYLES STATED THAT IT WOULD BE TO HER ADVANTAGE IF THEY MOVED THE ROAD OVER TO WHERE IT BELONGS, CHAIRMAN LYONS ASSURED MRS. BOYLES THAT HER PROBLEM WILL BE ADDRESSED WHETHER OR NOT SHE GETS THE ANSWER SHE WANTS. _COMMISSIONER FLETCHER ASKED IF WHAT WE ARE VOTING ON IS TO CLOSE 6TH AVENUE, AND CHAIRMAN LYONS STATED THAT IT WAS TO CLOSE 6TH AVENUE TO SOUTHBOUND TRAFFIC AT U.S. #1 AND TO PROCEED WITH THE DESIGN TO CUT 8TH STREET THROUGH TO U.S. #1 AND MAKE THAT THE 6TH AVENUE EXIT. THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. ft IT WAS VOTED ON AND THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS THEREUPON RECESSED AND RECONVENED AT 2:10 O'CLOCK P.M. ACTING AS THE DISTRICT BOARD OF FIRE COMMISSIONERS OF THE SOUTH INDIAN RIVER COUNTY FIRE DISTRICT. MINUTES OF THAT MEETING WILL BE PREPARED SEPARATELY. THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS THEREUPON RECONVENED AT 2:16 O'CLOCK P.M. WITH THE SAME MEMBERS PRESENT. PRESENTATION RE ENDANGERED SPECIES ADMINISTRATOR NELSON INTRODUCED DR. BAKER OF THE U. S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, WHO WAS PRESENT TO REPORT ON THE DICERANDRA IMMACULATA, AN ENDANGERED SPECIES OF THE MINT FAMILY. DR. BAKER PASSED AROUND SAMPLES OF THE PLANT FOR THE BOARD'S.INSPECTION, AND MADE THE FOLLOWING PRESENTATION: Dicerandra immaculata (Spotless -petaled Dicerandra) Dicerandra immaculata is in the mint family, a large plant family which includes many herbs used by people-- peppermint, sage, thyme and others. This plant was discovered in 1962 by Dr. Olga Lakela, a botanist associated for several years with the University of South Florida. Sometimes it is called Lakela's mint. it is known only from four sites along a ridge about 3 miles long and less than a mile wide. This ridge lies roughly thong U.S. 11ig11way 1 and is bisected by the Indian River - St. Lucie County line. Dicerandra immaculata is a short woody shrub about 18 inches in height. The leaves are narrow, and the flowers are usually purple, but sometimes almost white. The main flowering time is in the fall (September through November) but some flowering occurs poradically throughout the year. This plant is found in a very restricted habitat. It seems to prefer fairly open area with sandy soil near the top of the ridge. Very likely it was more widespread in the past, but its habitat has been altered by such things as residential and commercial development, road construction and sandmining. D E C 17 19 50 43 ��OK 5 PuE 463 --- -- Fr- DEC 171980 -- Sc I rs . rr ne ant o a ®a e W W 34S � IL i 6cOK 45 PAGE 464 I Crawford Pt 23RD ST 1 i INDIAN sT L Uc � � O Vl F ^--Ts4s ""S T L UC I E a•+� K FT PIERCE_8E1iEAiR t;; AVW E �i /�(�yE Iw C :BROOKkINEgg I BROOKIfNE a AVEIJ AVEIAV} ='TLJtte �I� VASO a081ES ! ,�:ate AVE I r? I > SA%TA , I CLARA z I y,� RI VO i I — 01 R 5PARK C BtvD i---, ITRUS_--PARK LAKElAHO BIYQa4 I L4[EI ANO II BLVDI r SAt E. a oi'R i 11 SALE ANO i- m _ 6 • =U -�A„/� ,I (_ _ JI _s I aD f PEN n otA ,{p1"„l[V(1)II l-' t PEasntotA ��•_p- RD IT ,WAETON — AVE FT WAiTON �i�i_J _ AVE } OELANO ^J AV _Jr D(LAND .4 4YARD '-1p I j .-�, --_; BAYARD R0 It ; _ .x ' W'�__WTNTER u � ��xs �_-OCAE A_ AVE; ^�\ 1KENW000 RD 3�„i ` `KE N1Y000 RO -- -” RO' i HIBISCUS RO Of. !�DONLON MAO, Hamdwn Artj �I .`_ PKWYl1' •'\ `,.;¢ c AVERd I;W9+_lc::t y-� 3r 99 j {s,� • �DEEP PARK,f © i AVE �fjy yq!?•''.t I �{I.�O t -"s° LAKEWOOD II � ATI4NTIC AVE PARK ii SANTA ROSA� �2�N;:kSANTA ROSAA �� PKC \\ BEL MONT?�j:� _ b 4VE Pla.a sa �PIUbtO5A t4o� r lig I Ip ', 'I SANTANA AV i a e �. LAgA , —ol,A I, 19 u 11 -f z12O ae� C•EORGES AD n i Lf ORGFS R n s I ROBERTS;'R: ,I _ROBERTS _R0 ARTNVRS R I`ARTHURS '^ FIB__ •`,! O F, f' /.y �.�F/FfI CO('F.:'iE , CYPRESS RO'I @I Q° �l �HOWARO RDI ` •a° p3 /� Q(7t ---- I -E E' '_Vrndale Are%I - �IAeESILE_RU�—�.� �fmper 09Qi4% PALOMAR l set rYa 'Z 4��� osYYAN ° ST ^'04! „ = I SAN CALLOS OR "•-- ' _ - - - /'� 667 JAMES 1 RD _ // _ MIRAMAp A_,, SANTAjLA-i AR4 CR a if NNINGS, I AGUNA 'y ; aF`Nu"9a ;ice st _R __ --__• U! E18 \ j 14 ;13 ' .I Y ,l ,iRARAR:yI I -- EL`ti AVE � No Key� I h1t1� r v Kok ®LINTY 1.17Tf.F' PARKS COVE 4 P" 11 co VE t;uv-j �h INDRID oaf%'el vie o 605 Zi— -- �.: COr� CT 16 pi 1 1 DEC 171980 BOOK 45 PAGE 466 Jacksonville Area Office U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 15 North Laura St. Jacksonville, Florida 32202 Listing and Critical Habitat - [That they Mean The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) is the Federal agency with the major responsibility for the Endangered Species Act of 1973. The Act provides for two categories, endangered and threatened. The 1978 amendments require that, in most cases, Critical Habitat be determined for each species when it is listed. Listing A. What listing does for a plant species. 1. Section 4 requires that the FWS carry out recovery activities for listed species, and Section 5 gives the FWS the authority to acquire land for listed species. 2. Section 6 provides for Cooperative Agreements with states. A Cooperative Agreement provides the state with matching funds for research, management and recovery of listed species. 3. Section 7 of the Act requires that all Federal activities in the area be done so as not to imperil the species or its habitat. This includes activities authorized, funded or carried out by Federal agencies. The Federal agency involved enters into "Section 7 Consultation" with the FWS. During consultation the agency and the FWS work together to insure that the project does not jeopardize the listed species. 4. Section 9 of the Act prohibits international or interstate trade in the listed species. B. What listing does not do for a plant species. 1. Listing does not prohibit the taking of plant species. (It does prohibit the taking of animal species.) 2. Listing does not affect private, state, or local governmental activities which may affect the listed plant species (unless there is some Federal participat:Ton.) Critical Habitat A. What Critical Habitat means? 1. The Critical Habitat map simply shows Federal agencies where the listed species is found. It makes it easier .for the agencies to know if and when to consult with the FWS on a project in the area. 2. Sometimes Critical Habitat is not designated because it is not prudent to let everyone know where the species, which may be vulnerable to collecting, can be found. Federal agencies still have their responsibility not to violate Section 7, i.e., they must still consult with the FWS. B. What Critical Habitat does not mean. 1. The designation of an area as Critical Habitat for a species does not mean that the FWS is going to acquire the area. 2. The designation of an area as Critical Habitat does not affect any private, state or local governmental activity within the area (unless Federal action is involved.) 46M What Happens Next If the FWS decides to go ahead with the listing of this species: 1. A proposal to list it will be published in the Federal Register; a 60—day comment period is provided for. 2. Notices will be published in local newspapers. 3. Letters and copies of the proposal are sent to local and state officials, other interested parties, etc. 4. If Critical Habitat is proposed, a public meeting will be held locally. CHAIRMAN LYONS NOTED THAT THE SOUTHERNMOST AREA WHERE THIS PLANT IS FOUND HAS RIGHT-OF-WAY IN IT AND WONDERED IF THIS OFFERED ANY CHANCE FOR SAVING THIS PLANT WITH A MINIMUM AMOUNT OF PROBLEMS. DR. BAKER BELIEVED THE RIGHT-OF-WAY IS NOT VERY WIDE AND POINTED OUT THAT THE PLANT IS FOUND ALSO BETWEEN THE RIGHTS-OF-WAY ON PRIVATE LAND. COMMISSIONER FLETCHER ASKED WHAT METHOD WAS USED TO DETERMINE THAT THIS PLANT WAS AN ENDANGERED SPECIES IN INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, AND DR. BAKER EXPLAINED THAT THE ONLY PLACE IN THE WORLD WHERE THIS PLANT GROWS IS IN INDIAN RIVER COUNTY AND ST. LUCIE COUNTY, AND, THEREFORE, JUST BECAUSE OF ITS SMALL AND RESTRICTED RANGE, IT IS ENDANGERED. COMMISSIONER FLETCHER ASKED IF IT IS DIFFICULT TO TRANSPLANT, AND DR. BAKER STATED THAT IT IS SO LITTLE KNOWN THAT NO ONE KNOWS. COMMISSIONER FLETCHER INQUIRED WHETHER THE AGENCY HAS NOTIFIED OWNERS OF PROPERTY WHERE THIS PLANT IS LOCATED, AND DR. BAKER STATED THAT SHE WAS OBTAINING OWNERSHIP DATA AND THE OWNERS WOULD BE NOTIFIED BEFORE THEY GO TO THE FEDERAL REGISTER. QUESTIONS AROSE ABOUT HOW THIS WOULD AFFECT PROJECTS THAT HAVE FEDERAL FUNDING, AND DR. BAKER ANSWERED THAT IT WOULD BE NECESSARY TO ENTER INTO CONSULTATION WITH THEIR AGENCY IN REGARD TO SUCH PROJECTS. COMMISSIONER WODTKE BROUGHT UP OUR PROPOSED SOUTH COUNTY WASTE WATER PLANT WHICH WILL BE DONE IN CONJUNCTION WITH FEDERAL FUNDING AND ASKED.IF PAST HISTORY WOULD INDICATE THIS WOULD PRESENT ANY SPECIFIC PROBLEMS. DR. BAKER STATED THAT EACH CONSULTATION IS ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS AND MAY TAKE WEEKS OR MONTHS BECAUSE RESEARCH MUST BE DONE. 47 Booz 4 PA'GE 46 7 DEC 171980 rox 45 PacE 468 SHE CONTINUED THAT WHAT HER AGENCY NEEDS TO KNOW BEFORE THEY DECLARE THIS A CRITICAL HABITAT IS WHETHER THE BOARD IS PLANNING A FEDERALLY FUNDED SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT IN THIS AREA. CHAIRMAN LYONS BELIEVED IT IS IMPORTANT NOT TO BE A PART OF THE DESTRUCTION OF ANY SPECIES - WHETHER PLANT OR ANIMAL - AND ANNOUNCED THAT HE WILL ASK THE AUDUBON SOCIETY TO SEE IF THEY CAN FIND A WAY TO TRANSPLANT THIS PARTICULAR SPECIES AND MOVE IT TO A SAFE PLACE. DISCUSSION RE APPOINTMENT OF A COMMISSIONER AS AN EX OFFICIO MEMBER OF THE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION THE BOARD REVIEWED THE FOLLOWING COMMUNICATIONS FROM PLANNING DIRECTOR REVER AND THE CHAIRMAN OF THE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION: DEPARTMENT December 11, 1980 MEMO TO: Board of County Commissioners FROM: David M. Rever, Planning and Zoning Director SUBJECT: Appointment of'a County Comminssioner`as an Ex Officio Member of the Planning and Zoning Board, It has been my continuing concern that.there,has been and is a lack of coordination regarding policy and attitude about growth and develop- ment. I am also concerned about shifting present delegated respon- sibilities back to the delegating authority and increasing the workload of the Board. In my opinion -administration is best handled by delegating responsibility to competent persons or bodies in order that proper attention can be allotted to each situation with.a minimal amount of delay. With.this in mind, I respectfully request that the Board give consider- ation to appointing a member of its group to attend the Planning and Zoning meetings; acting as liaison between the two bodies. This is a practice which has been employed by other governmental bodies with which I have been associated and found to promote cooperation and understanding regarding policy and direction for growth and development. This matter has been discussed with Mr. Nelson and presented to the Planning and Zoning Board for their consideration. The concensus of these persons was that such an action could possibly achieve the desired conditions pursued by us all. � a � 48 December 25, 1980 Mr. Patrick B. Lyons, Chairman County Commission 17 Sailfish Road Vero Beach, Florida 32960 Dear Mr. Lyons: 7- J The suggestion that we have a member of the County Commission sit on the Planning and Zoning Commission as an ex -officio member was presented at our December 11, 1980 meeting. Margaret Bowman, Richard McCleary, John Tippin and I were present. Although we are all eager to have increased communication with the County Commission, we feel that having an ex -officio member sit with us does not necessarily improve communication. We would like to extend an open invitation to all the County Commissioners to attend any or all of our workshops and hearings and listen to the dis- cussions. We will soon have an agenda showing when the remaining elements of our Comprehensive Plan will be discussed and hopefully be ready for hearing. We would welcome your hearing the discussions and public input on these elements. In addition, the members of the Planning and Zoning Commission would welcome some joint workshops with the members of the County Commission to discuss and clarify policy, ideas and concerns, future ordinances, and the Comprehensive Plan. All of us talking together would, I believe, increase communication and understanding. One person carrying information and ideas from one group to another always presents difficulties no matter how well intentioned that person is. Whatever your decision is, we of the Planning and Zoning Commission look forward to working closely with you in the coming years. Sincerely yours, Mrs. Karl H. Eggert, Chairman Indian River County Planning and Zoning Commission PLANNING DIRECTOR REVER COMMENTED THAT MRS. EGGERT'S LETTER WAS WRITTEN LATER THAN HIS MEMO AND WHILE HE WOULD LIKE TO SEE SOME- THING MORE OFFICIAL, HE MAINLY WANTED TO HAVE BETTER COMMUNICATION. CHAIRMAN LYONS AGREED WE DO HAVE A COMMUNICATIONS PROBLEM, BUT FELT STRONGLY THAT THE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION AND COUNTY COMMISSION SHOULD REMAIN SEPARATE BODIES. HE SUGGESTED A WORKSHOP SESSION BE SET UP TO DISCUSS THIS WITH THE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION AND AT THE SAME TIME POSSIBLY COME UP WITH SOME CHANGES IN THE SITE PLAN ORDINANCE TO PROVIDE THE BOARD WITH THE OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW SITE PLANS OF THE LARGER PROJECTS AND DEVELOPMENTS AS PREVIOUSLY DISCUSSED. 49 nox 45 PAGE 69 it DEC 171980 BvoK 45 MAW THE BOARD MEMBERS CONCURRED WITH THE CHAIRMAN AND IT WAS AGREED TO TRY TO HAVE A WORKSHOP MEETING WITH THE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION SOMETIME IN JANUARY. LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING ASSISTANCE CONTRACT FOR $20,000 GRANT MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, SECONDED BY COMMIS- SIONER BIRD TO ACCEPT THE CONTRACT FOR THE GRANT AS SET OUT ABOVE AND AUTHORIZE THE SIGNATURE OF THE CHAIRMAN. COMMISSIONER WODTKE COMMENTED THAT THESE ARE THE DOLLARS THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT HAS ANTICIPATED RECEIVING TO HELP FINISH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND THE BALANCE WILL BE USED TO FUND THE BARRIER ISLAND STUDY. PLANNING DIRECTOR REVER INFORMED THE BOARD THAT THE COUNTY, OR GRANTEE, AGREES TO PROVIDE A CASH MATCH OF $4,500 PLUS AN IN-KIND MATCH OF $5,500. COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK REQUESTED THAT THE STATUS REPORT ON THE BARRIER ISLAND STUDY BE DISCUSSED AT THIS TIME. COMMISSIONER FLETCHER REPORTED THAT HE ATTENDED THE TREASURE COAST REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL MEETING AND WHILE THERE WAS SOME COMMENT AT THE MEETING ABOUT THE REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL INVOLVING ITSELF IN OUTSIDE PLANNING AND CONSULTING IN THE FUTURE, THEY DID CONSENT TO DO -THE STUDY AND THE CONTRACT SHOULD BE COMING BACK SHORTLY. CHAIRMAN LYONS DID NOT FEEL THAT IS CONSIDERED OUTSIDE CONSULTING, AND NOTED THAT THE COMMENT IN THAT REGARD WAS MADE BY A NEW MEMBER APPOINTED BY THE GOVERNOR. COMMISSIONER WODTKE NOTED THAT THE MAN WHO MADE THE COMMENT IS IN THE PRIVATE CONSULTING BUSINESS. HE FELT THAT IN OUR PARTICULAR SITUATION, THE EXPERTISE AND EXTENSIVE REGIONAL KNOWLEDGE OF THE MEN IN THE REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL WILL SUPPLY US WITH A MORE MEANINGFUL REPORT THAN WE COULD OBTAIN BY GOING SOMEWHERE ELSE FOR A CONSULTANT. HE FURTHER NOTED THAT IF THE REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL DOES ONE OR TWO OF THESE REPORTS A YEAR, IT HAS THE EFFECT OF REDUCING THE COST TO THE COUNTY FOR THEIR PARTICIPATION IN THE COUNCIL. 50 COMMISSIONER FLETCHER STATED THAT HE HAPPENED TO BELIEVE THAT OUR PLANNING STAFF HAS THE CAPABILITIES TO DO SUCH A REPORT, THAT WE HAVE THE INFORMATION AVAILABLE RIGHT NOW, AND IT IS JUST A MATTER OF ASSIMILATION. CHAIRMAN LYONS CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. IT WAS VOTED ON AND CARRIED, WITH COMMISSIONER FLETCHER VOTING IN OPPOSITION COMMISSIONER BIRD ASKED IF WE ARE STILL ON THE ORIGINAL SCHEDULE FOR LARCH, AND THIS WAS CONFIRMED. FINAL APPROVAL OF BENT PINES SUBDIVISION — UNITS III AND IV ADMINISTRATOR NELSON REVIEWED THE STATUS OF BENT PINES SUB— DIVISION AS EXPLAINED IN THE FOLLOWING LETTER FROMJAMES BEINDORF: December 10, 1980 Mr. Neil A. Nelson County Administrator Indian River County Lawyers Title Building 2345 14th Avenue Vero Beach, Florida 32960 Re: Final Plat Units III and IV Bent Pine Indian River County, Florida Dear Mr. Nelson: I am requesting that the final approval for Units III and IV of Bent Pine be placed on the next County Commission agenda, December 17, 1980. You will re- member that several months ago final approval was given to these units by the County Commission together with the acceptance of a Performance Bond by Florida Land Company to construct all roads and drainage in relation to these two units. Florida Land Company did not plat these units at the time and as they reviewed the plats, they decided that they needed to leave utility easements on all side lot lines. In the ensuing period, several of the officers of Florida Land Company changed positions as well as one of the Co -Trustees of the Land Trust, which meant that different signatures were now required. It is also apparent that since the plat was originally approved, that the County Chairman has also changed. This means that there are other signatures that had to be obtained, including the new Chairman. I would appreciate if you would place this item on the next agenda so we could explain this to the Board and have the approval granted. Very truly yours, BEINDORF AND ASSOCIATES, INC. james L. Beindorf DEC 17 1980 51 soon 45 'FAcE 471 L_ DEC 171980 GOOK 45 PAGE 472 ADMINISTRATOR NELSON INFORMED THE BOARD THAT THE DEVELOPERS HAVE ADDED ABOUT 17 UTILITY EASEMENTS. HE STATED THAT THIS SUB- DIVISION AS PLATTED MEETS ALL OUR REQUIREMENTS AND IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL. ENGINEER BEINDORF CONFIRMED THAT NOTHING WAS CHANGED ON THE PLAT EXCEPT ADDING THESE EASEMENTS, WHICH THE OWNERS FELT WERE FOR THE BETTERMENT OF FUTURE CONSTRUCTION AND USAGE OF THE PROPERTY; NO ADDITIONAL LOTSWERE ADDED; AND THEY HAVE A DENSITY OF ABOUT 1.6. BECAUSE OF THE CHANGES BOTH IN BOARD MEMBERS AND COMPANY PERSONNEL, THEY JUST FELT IT WAS PROPER TO COME BACK BEFORE THE NEWLY CONSTITUTED BOARD AND ASK FOR APPROVAL, ATTORNEY COLLINS HAD A QUESTION ABOUT THE DEDICATION ON THE PLAT AND STATED THEY DID NOT APPEAR TO BE DEDICATING THE ROADS EITHER TO THE PUBLIC OR KEEPING THEM PRIVATE. ENGINEER BEINDORF STATED THAT THE ROADS ARE NOT DEDICATED TO THE PUBLIC AND READ THE WORDING FROM SHEET N0. 2 WHERE THE ROADS ARE SHOWN AS PRIVATE ROADS. IT WAS DETERMINED THE BOARD WAS LOOKING AT DIFFERENT DOCUMENTS WHICH DID NOT HAVE THE SAME WORDING. CHAIRMAN LYONS RECESSED THE MEETING BRIEFLY FOR THE ATTORNEY TO STUDY THE CORRECT PAPERS. ATTORNEY COLLINS, AFTER REVIEWING THE CORRECT DOCUMENTS, RECOMMENDED THAT THE BOARD APPROVE THE PLAT SUBJECT TO MR.. BEINDORF ADDING TO THE*EXISTING NOTE (1) CABLEVISION ALONG WITH UTILITIES, AND (2) A PROVISION THAT ALLOWS THE COUNTY, WHEN THE COUNTY TAKES OVER THE UTILITIES, TO USE THE ROADS AND EASEMENTS FOR UTILITY PURPOSES AND TO HAVE LIMITED USE OF THE ROADS FOR EMERGENCY PURPOSES, SUCH AS FIRE, AMBULANCE, POLICE PROTECTION, ETC. MR. BEINDORF STATED THAT THE OWNERS WOULD HAVE NO OBJECTION TO THIS WORDING, AND THAT MR. CLARK, PRESIDENT OF FLORIDA LAND COMPANY, WOULD BE WILLING TO GRANT AN EASEMENT ON THE OTHER UNITS THAT WOULD GIVE THE SAME RIGHTS. MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK, SECONDED BY COM- MISSIONER WODTKE TO GRANT FINAL APPROVAL OF BENT PINE SUBDIVISION, F-_ _ 1 m UNITS III AND IV SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS LISTED BY ATTORNEY COLLINS FOR UTILITIES AND EMERGENCY PURPOSES BEING INCLUDED ON THE DEDICATION. COMMISSIONER FLETCHER ASKED WHAT PROCEDURES THERE ARE TO INFORM THE POTENTIAL PURCHASER THAT HE IS BUYING A WATER SYSTEM THAT IS FRANCHISED BY THE COUNTY BUT NOT MAINTAINED OR SUSTAINED BY THE COUNTY. MR. CLARK, PRESIDENT OF FLORIDA LAND COMPANY, EXPLAINED THAT A SUBDIVISION IN EXCESS OF 50 UNDEVELOPED PLATTED LOTS IS REQUIRED BY THE LAND SALES BOARD OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA AND N.U.D. OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO HAVE A FILING MADE, IN WHICH FILING THERE IS A VOLUMINOUS STATEMENT THAT INCLUDES AN EXACTING DESCRIPTION OF THE PHYSICAL FACILITIES OF THE SUBDIVISION, INCLUDING THE UTILITIES. THIS FILING EXPLAINS THAT THE WATER SYSTEM IS OWNED BY BENT PINE, WHICH IS A SUBSIDIARY OF FLORIDA LAND COMPANY AND GIVES ALL THE DETAILS — THE.STATEMENT RE SEWAGE HAS THE SAME VERBIAGE. COMMISSIONER FLETCHER ASSUMED THEIR UTILITY COMPANY WAS FRANCHISED BY THE COUNTY AND ASKED IF THERE IS A STIPULATION IN THAT AGREEMENT THAT THIS UTILITY COMPANY WILL BE INCORPORATED INTO THE COUNTY'S FUTURE SYSTEM, MR. CLARK STATED THAT THE COUNTY HAS THE RIGHT TO PURCHASE AT ANY TIME UP TO AND DURING THE SEVENTH YEAR AND THEN THE RIGHT LAPSES. COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK THOUGHT ALL COUNTY FRANCHISES HAD A PROVISION THAT THE SYSTEM WOULD BE CONVEYED AT NO COST, AND ATTORNEY COLLINS EXPLAINED THAT THIS PARTICULAR ONE IS OLDER THAN SOME AND WAS NEGOTIATED WITH THE PRIOR COMMISSION. MR. CLARK NOTED THERE ARE THREE OPTIONS — THE COUNTY CAN TAKE OVER ANY TIME IN SEVEN YEARS; CAN LET THIS RIGHT EXPIRE; OR CAN TAKE OVER ALL LINES, LIFT STATIONS, MANHOLES, ETC., AND PURCHASE THE LOCATION OF THE TREATMENT PLANT AND SITE AT A PREDETERMINED PRICE. COMMISSIONER FLETCHER ASKED IF THE CORPORATION THAT HOLDS THIS COMPANY IS A SUBSIDIARY OF FLORIDA LAND COMPANY, AND MR. CLARK STATED THAT THEY ARE VERY HEAVILY INVOLVED IN THE UTILITY BUSINESS AND IT IS ONE OF SIX UTILITY COMPANIES THEY OWN. DEC 1'71980 53 'mor. 45 ,-PAaE 4 13 rp- DEC 171980 mox 45 Pw* 4,74 COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. IT WAS VOTED ON AND CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL - COLONIAL HEIGHTS SSD ADMINISTRATOR NELSON PASSED OUT PLATS OF COLONIAL HEIGHTS SUBDIVISION TO THE BOARD AND REPORTED THAT THIS HAS BEEN REVIEWED BY THE TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMITTEE AND FOUND ACCEPTABLE. HE NOTED IT WOULD BE DESIRABLE TO GET A COMMITMENT BY THE DEVELOPER TO PLACE LOW MAINTENANCE SHRUBBERY IN THE CUL DE SAC AREAS, ALTHOUGH WE CANNOT FORCE HIM TO DO THIS. CHAIRMAN LYONS ASKED THAT THE RECORD SHOW THAT MR. ZORC, DEVELOPER OF COLONIAL HEIGHTS SUBDIVISION, HAS COMMITTED HIMSELF TO THE LOW MAINTENANCE SHRUBBERY AS SUGGESTED. MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, TO GRANT TENTATIVE APPROVAL OF COLONIAL HEIGHTS SUBDIVISION WITH THE STIPULATION REGARDING THE LOW MAINTENANCE SHRUBBERY IN THE CUL DE SAC AREAS. COMMISSIONER FLETCHER ASKED SEVERAL QUESTIONS REGARDING THE PEOPLE WHO WERE INVOLVED IN THE ACTUAL REVIEW OF THESE PLATS, THE EVENTUAL ACCEPTANCE OF THESE ROADS FOR MAINTENANCE BY THE COUNTY, AND THE STEPS THE OWNER NEXT TAKES AFTER THE PLAT IS APPROVED, DISCUSSION ENSUED ABOUT THE 15' RIGHT-OF-WAY ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE SUBDIVISION AND WHETHER IT IS A HALF ROAD SITUATION. PLANNING DIRECTOR REVER EXPLAINED THAT THERE WAS A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF CONTROVERSY OVER ADEQUATE BUFFERING BETWEEN COLONIAL HEIGHTS AND COLONIAL TERRACE AND INTERCONNECTION OF ROADS; THE STAFF FELT THE 15' RIGHT-OF-WAY NEVER WOULD BE USED AND DID NOT GET INTO THE QUESTION OF ADDING ADDITIONAL RIGHT-OF-WAY AND GETTING INTO A CONTROVERSY ABOUT A PUBLIC ROAD 'BORDERING ON TWO SUBDIVISIONS. IT WAS NOTED THAT ACCESS FROM 8TH STREET, WHICH THEY FELT WAS ESSENTIAL, FLOWS FROM OLD DIXIE HIGHWAY. COMMISSIONER BIRD BELIEVED THAT THE PLANNING & ZONING COM- MISSION HAD CONTEMPLATED MORE BUFFERING THAN JUST THE 15' BETWEEN THE li� so _I MULTIFAMILY AND SINGLE FAMILY SUBDIVISIONS, AND MR. ZORC POINTED OUT THAT THE OWNER AT THAT TIME HAD AN ENTIRELY DIFFERENT CONCEPT OF LAND USE AND WAS NOT SUBDIVIDING INTO 1/2 ACRE LOTS. THE PRESENT PLAT CALLS FOR A LOW DENSITY MULTIFAMILY USE. HE FURTHER NOTED THAT THERE REALLY IS NO BUFFER REQUIREMENT THAT HE KNEW OF AND THEY JUST LEFT THE 15' BECAUSE THERE WAS NO USE THEY COULD SEE FOR IT. COMMISSIONER WODTKE BROUGHT UP THE FACT THAT WATER AND SEWER FOR THIS MULTI -FAMILY SUBDIVISION IS PLANNED TO BE HANDLED BY INDIVIDUAL WELLS AND SEPTIC TANKS. MR, ZORC INFORMED THE BOARD THAT THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT HAS GIVEN THEM A LETTER APPROVING FOUR UNITS ON A 1/2 ACRE LOT WITH WELL AND SEPTIC TANK. DISCUSSION AROSE ABOUT MAXIMUM DENSITY ALLOWABLE, AND SENIOR PLANNER MARSH CONFIRMED THAT THE LATEST RULING FROM THE HEALTH DEPART- MENT WAS THAT MAXIMUM DENSITY COULD BE NO MORE THAN 4 UNITS PER 1/2 ACRE FOR WELL AND SEPTIC TANK; MR. MARSH POINTED OUT, HOWEVER, THAT THE COUNTY EARLY THIS YEAR ADOPTED ORDINANCE 80-13 WHICH STIPULATES THAT THE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF UNITS ALLOWED ON WELL AND SEPTIC TANK IS FOUR PER ACRE. HE NOTED THAT IN REGARD TO PLAT APPROVAL, DENSITY IS NOT AN ISSUE® THIS PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY ZONED R -2B AND THE DENSITY IS INHERENTLY GUARANTEED BY THE ZONING.. COMMISSIONER WODTKE NOTED THAT THE EXISTING ZONING ALLOWS UP TO S UNITS PER ACRE, AND HE FELT WE SHOULD HAVE SOME INDICATION ON THAT PLAT AS TO HOW WATER AND SEWER WILL BE PROVIDED. ATTORNEY COLLINS AGREED THIS COULD BE ON THE PLAT. HE FELT ONE POINT THAT HAS NOT BEEN BROUGHT OUT IS THAT THE COLONIAL TERRACE RESIDENTS HAVE BEEN QUITE ACTIVELY INTERESTED IN THIS DEVELOPMENT, AND HE WONDERED IF THE COMMISSION WOULD WANT TO GIVE THEM THE OPPOR- TUNITY OF FURTHER INPUT. COMMISSIONER FLETCHER STATED THAT HE HAD NO PROBLEM WITH THAT, BUT QUESTIONED IF WE INITIATE APPROVAL NOW AND ADDRESS THE PROBLEMS RE DENSITY LATER, IF THE COMMISSION IS NOT OPENING ITSELF UP TO A LIABLE ACTION RE INTENT. DEC 171980 55 ��x 45 PA-GE475 DEC 171980 moy 45 PACE 476 ATTORNEY COLLINS NOTED THERE ARE SEPARATE ISSUES - FIRST, WHETHER THE PLAT MEETS PLANNING REQUIREMENTS AND THEN LATER WHAT CAN BE CONSTRUCTED ON THE LAND AND WHAT MEETS THE ZONING REQUIREMENTS. CHAIRMAN LYONS FELT THE ISSUE IS WHETHER WE WANT TO RULE ON THIS TODAY OR LET THE COLONIAL TERRACE RESIDENTS BE HEARD. MR. ZORC AGAIN POINTED OUT THAT WHATEVER IS PERMITTED TO BE BUILT IS WHAT THEY WILL HAVE TO BUILD. HE EMPHASIZED THAT THEY HAVE COMPLIED WITH ALL REGULATIONS SO FAR. THE BOARD CONTINUED TO DISCUSS THE IMPACT OF THIS SUBDIVISION ON COLONIAL TERRACE SUBDIVISION, AND COMMISSIONER BIRD STATED THAT HE WOULD LIKE TO HEAR FROM THE RESIDENTS OF COLONIAL TERRACE BEFORE TAKING ACTION. COMMISSIONER FLETCHER CONCURRED, NOTING THAT THIS IS THE FIRST CHANCE HE HAS HAD TO LOOK AT THIS, AND HE DID NOT FEEL IT IS REASONABLE TO REACT SO QUICKLY. MR. ZORC REQUESTED THAT MR. FLETCHER CONSIDER THAT THEY HAVE BEEN WORKING ON THIS FOR MANY MONTHS AND HAVE BEEN THROUGH EVERY APPROPRIATE DEPARTMENT AND THE TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMITTEE, AND ALL HAVE MADE POSITIVE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR APPROVAL. IN ADDITION, MR. ZORC POINTED OUT THAT THIS HAS BEEN DISCUSSED PREVIOUSLY WITH THE RESIDENTS OF COLONIAL TERRACE. THE WHOLE PROBLEM CENTERED ON THE ROADS BRINGING TRAFFIC INTO COLONIAL TERRACE, AND THAT IS WHY THEY CONSULTED WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND HAVE LAID THE PLAT OUT AS IT IS NOW PRESENTED. CHAIRMAN LYONS EMPHASIZED THAT HERE IS A DEVELOPER WHO HAS MET ALL OUR REQUIREMENTS; HE IS BRINGING BEFORE US A PRELIMINARY PLAT; HE IS NOT.ASKING FOR ANY CHANGE IN ZONING; HE HAS TRIED TO AVOID CREATING A PROBLEM WITH THE NEIGHBORING SUBDIVISION; AND THE CHAIRMAN COULD NOT SEE WHY WE SHOULD DO ANYTHING BUT APPROVE THE PRELIMINARY PLAT AS PRESENTED. COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK AGREED. COMMISSIONER BIRD STATED THAT HIS PROBLEM IS THAT THE DEVELOPER IS PUTTING IN S UNITS PER ACRE WITH ONLY A 15' BUFFER BETWEEN THIS SUBDIVISION AND SOME OF THE FINEST HOMES IN VERO BEACH, AND HE FELT THESE PEOPLE SHOULD BE MADE AWARE OF WHAT IS HAPPENING IN THEIR BACK YARD BECAUSE HE BELIEVED WHEN THIS WAS PREVIOUSLY PLATTED, THERE WAS A CONSIDERABLE BUFFER ROAD. COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK NOTED THAT THERE STILL WILL BE SITE PLAN APPROVAL, BUT COMMISSIONER WODTKE POINTED OUT THAT WHEN THE BOARD GIVES THIS APPROVAL, THE DEVELOPER CAN GET UNDER WAY AND CUT IN ROADS. HE FELT THAT THE ROAD WAS THE VITAL PROBLEM AND ASKED IF THE 30` ROAD ON THE NORTH IS GOING TO BE PAVED BY THE DEVELOPER. MR. ZORC STATED THAT IT IS NOT BECAUSE IT IS NOT PART OF THEIR DEVELOPMENT. COMMISSIONER WODTKE ASKED IF THE COUNTY HAS NOT BEEN REQUIRING THAT SUCH ROADS BE PAVED, AND PLANNER MARSH STATED THAT A POLICY HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED THAT ON ABUTTING PUBLIC ROADS, THE DEVELOPER WAS REQUIRED TO DEDICATE THE ADDITIONAL RIGHT-OF-WAY TO MATCH. HE BELIEVED THIS WAS A PUBLIC ROAD SITUATION AND THE DEVELOPER WAS TO DEDICATE THE RIGHT-OF-WAY NECESSARY AND PARTICIPATE IN PAVING OF AT LEAST A HALF -ROAD. MR. ZORC POINTED OUT, REGARDING THE CONCERN ABOUT COLONIAL TERRACE, THAT THEY ARE BACKING UP TO THE REAR LINE OF THEIR LOTS; THEY ARE NOT PUTTING ANY,TRAFFIC WHATSOEVER INTO THAT SUBDIVISION; AND TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION THE REQUIRED SETBACKS, THEY WILL HAVE 75' TO 100' BETWEEN BUILDINGS. IN REGARD TO DENSITY, HE NOTED THAT THEY PURCHASED THE LAND FOR THE MULTIPLE DENSITY AND THEY WILL ONLY BE PUTTING IN ABOUT 7 UNITS PER ACRE. CONSIDERABLE DISCUSSION ENSUED REGARDING ON WHAT BASIS YOU DENY AN APPROVAL TO AN INDIVIDUAL WHO HAS MET ALL THE REQUIREMENTS, AND COMMISSIONER FLETCHER NOTED IT WAS NOT A DENIAL, BUT SIMPLY TO GIVE THE NEIGHBORS WHO WOULD BE IMPACTED MORE OPPORTUNITY FOR INPUT. MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER FLETCHER, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER BIRD, TO DELAY ACTION ON TENTATIVE APPROVAL OF COLONIAL HEIGHTS SUBDIVISION UNTIL THE NEXT COMMISSION MEETING AND NOTIFY THE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS. DEC 171900 57 aoox 45 earE 477 _I DEC 171980 Boa- 45 %E478 CHAIRMAN LYONS STATED THAT HE PLANNED TO VOTE AGAINST THAT MOTION BECAUSE HE FELT WE ARE PUTTING THE DEVELOPER TO UNNECESSARY DELAY. DISCUSSION CONTINUED, AND ENGINEER SCHMUCKER COMMENTED THAT COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK HAD MADE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL WHICH HAD NOT BEEN VOTED ON. IN CHECKING BACK -THROUGH THE RECORDING SECRETARY�S NOTES, THIS WAS DETERMINED TO BE CORRECT. MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER FLETCHER, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER BIRD, TO TABLE THE PREVIOUS MOTION TO THE NEXT MEETING. THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION ON THE MOTION TO TABLE. COMMISSIONERS BIRD, FLETCHER AND WODTKE VOTED IN FAVOR; COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK AND CHAIRMAN LYONS VOTED IN OPPOSITION. THE MOTION CARRIED 3 To 2, MR. ZORC ASKED WHAT HE SHOULD DO NEXT, AND COMMISSIONER FLETCHER STATED THAT HE WOULD LIKE THE PEOPLE OF COLONIAL TERRACE TO BE NOTIFIED THAT THIS MATTER IS BEING PUT ON THE AGENDA OF THE NEXT MEETING. COMMISSIONER BIRD WISHED TO HAVE THE SEWER SITUATION CLARIFIED AS TO NUMBER OF UNITS, WHAT IS APPLICABLE, WHAT OUR PROTECTION IS, ETC. PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL - GENESEA SUBDIVISION ADMINISTRATOR NELSON REPORTED THAT THE TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE HAD RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF GENESEA SUBDIVISION WITH ONLY ONE FURTHER RECOMMENDATION - A REQUEST THAT A WALKWAY BE BUILT OVER THE DUNE. ROBERT LLOYD, AGENT FOR THE DEVELOPER, HAS AGREED TO BUILDING OF THE DUNE CROSSING, AND MR. NELSON, THEREFORE, RECOMMENDED PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL. COMMISSIONER FLETCHER ASKED IF WE HAVE THE AGREEMENT IN WRITING, AND IT WAS DETERMINED WE DO NOT, COMMISSIONER BIRD SUGGESTED THAT THIS REQUIREMENT BE MADE A CONDITION OF THE MOTION. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BIRD, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER FLETCHER, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY GRANTED TENTATIVE APPROVAL OF GENESEA SUBDIVISION SUBJECT TO THE WRITTEN GUARANTEE OF THE DEVELOPER THAT A WALKWAY WILL BE CONSTRUCTED ACROSS THE DUNE LINE, SAID AGREEMENT TO BE SUBJECT TO APPROVAL OF THE COUNTY ATTORNEY. WABASSO BEACH LANDSCAPING PROJECT THE BOARD REVIEWED THE RECOMMENDATION MADE BY THE ADMINIS- TRATOR IN REGARD TO PROPOSALS PRESENTED FOR LANDSCAPING WABASSO BEACH PARK: December 10, 1980 MEMORANDUM TO: Board of County Commissioners FROM: County Administrator SUBJECT: Wabasso Beach Landscaping Project ENCLOSURE: David Marsh's Memo of November 26, 1980 W/Attachments David Marsh outlines a proposal to landscape Wabasso Beach Park. This, along with other information is enclosed. There are two alternatives available to landscape the park. The first alternative involves utilization of commercial suppliers. The commercial supplier would supply all materials and labor. The advantage of this alternative would be: 1. Completion of project in minimum of time. 2. Planting of material would be guaranteed. Disadvantage to this alternative: 1. The estimated cost would be $13,000 to $15,000. 2. Public not involved. The second alternative would be to 1a11.1scape the par` utilizing county personnel with maximum public involvement. The advantage to this alternative would be: 1. Reduced cost, estimated $7,000, depending upon donations received. 2. Maximum involvement by public, creating a protective attitude. 3. Full use of county capability. DEC 171980 59 am 45FADE 47� DEC 1719 80 45 PAGE 480 Disadvantage to this alternative: 1. Longer time required tc complete the project. 2. More difficult to coordinate. 3. Maximum reliance on public support. It is recommended that: 1. The landscaping of the park be accomplished. 2. The second alternative which was proposed by David Marsh to utilize the public in the effort be adopted. 3. A Commissioner be appointed to coordinate the project with the assistance of Paul Palmiotto, the Urban Forester, Bill Cook, Park Supervisor and other county personnel. NAN/ep ei1\tA. Nelson, C my Administrator ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK, SECONDED BY COMMIS- SIONER WODTKE, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTED THE SECOND PROPOSAL WHEREBY WE HAVE COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT IN THE WABASSO BEACH LANDSCAPING PROJECT AND APPOINTED COMMISSIONER FLETCHER TO ASSIST IN COORDINATING THE PROJECT AS OUTLINED. 60 � INOIAN RIVERCOUNTY November 26, 1980 MEMO T0: Neil Nelson, County Administrator FROM: DaPidrsh, Senior Planner SUBJECT: Wabasso Beach Park Project Attached are suggested news releases/announcements, bid solicitation, etc. regarding our -proposed landscaping effort at Wabasso Beach Park. Paul Palmiotto was instrumental.in developing this packet, and we are .both hopeful that a good public response will be received.*. If this proposal. is acceptable, we would suggest that the requests for public donations be aired from December 14th through December 28th. In this manner the donations could be picked up and stored until the two different planting phases which are recommended for January 5 - 13 and January 21 - 30. ...The placement of poles and cables along the boardwalk and bluffline,.around the restroom and along the property boundaries, could probably best be accomplished after all major construction is com- pleted and large landscaping is in place; yet before the smaller landscaping project is undertaken. Thus we'have allowed for, the week of the 14th through the 20th for this.installation effort. Significant amounts of.poles (min. 6" dia.) and heavy strand cable will be required. In summary it should be noted that the local 4-H Club has volunteered to assist County crews in the planting program. I would suspect,.however, that their assistance would likely be available during the week -end and not during week days. Secondarily, Pavl,Palmiotto is trying to arrange for a Division of .forestry "tree spade" to be made available during the week of January 5 - 12 for installation of large material. Hopefully this will cover most of the groundwork necessary to accomplish the final leg of -the Wabasso Beach project. We have developed this scenario as a suggested means of insuring a good effective landscaping project at a minimal cost. If, after your review, you wish to discuss this further, please advise. You may also wish to take the proposal* to the County Commission, although I be- lieve that they indicated tacit support for the concept in the past. At any rate we do need to move ahead to insure that all of the parties are notified, coordination is arranged, and supplemental materials are secured. Thanks for your consideration of this matter. DM: j t MERMOAVio M. REVER • DIRECTOR 212114TH AVE. VERO ©EACH. FL 32960 • 305/567-5142 INCREASE OF GAS ALLOCATION FOR INDIAN RIVER COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR NELSON REPORTED THAT THE FOLLOWING MEMO WAS PUT ON THE AGENDA FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES, AND CIVIL DEFENSE DIRECTOR NUZIE IS STARTING THE LONG, ARDUOUS PROCESS TO GO BEFORE THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY AND MAKE THIS REQUEST, 1,. 61 A MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: BOOK 45 PAGE 4,82 December 9, 1980 Board of County Commissioners County Administrator Increase of Gas Allocation for Indian River County During periods of reduced fuel supply, the County is affected by the amount of fuel consumed during the base period of 1978. This creates a hardship; because, the County has experienced a dynamic growth and increase in Population since 1978. I have asked Lee Nuzie to take appropriate action to attempt to have our allocation increased. Our chances are better now than they would be during periods of decreased supplies. Lee Nuzie's memo to me, enclosed, outlines what is required to increase this allocation. Neil A. Nelson, County Administrator BID RE SECURITY SYSTEM FOR COUNTY BARN AREA ADMINISTRATOR NELSON EXPLAINED THAT THE SILENT/LOCAL MONITORING SECURITY SYSTEM ON WHICH BIDS WERE SENT OUT WOULD PROVIDE COMPLETE FENCE AND MOTION PROTECTION WITHIN THE COUNTY BARN COMPOUND, THE CONTRACTOR THAT THIS ORIGINALLY WAS AWARDED TO HAS SINCE GONE OUT OF BUSINESS AND THEY ARE RECOMMENDING THE BID BE RE -AWARDED AS FOLLOWS: December 3, 1980 MEMORANDUM T0:Neil����on, County Admi FROM: Harold M. McCormick, Assistant County Administrator SUBJECT: IRC Bid 60, October 23, 1980 Memo, Director of Materials, December 1, 1980 I have reviewed the information from the Director of Materials and based upon the information that Martin Security has evidently gone out of business, recommend that the County Commissioners re -award the bid to the second low bidder, Guardian Systems. Bid was awarded to Martin Security at the Board meeting of November 5, 1980. From a budgeted figure of $12,938.45, both firms were well below that figure and the bid tabulation shows the following: Initial Installation 24 Hour Monitoring Monthly Maintenance Martin Security $6,975.00 $25.00 $50.00 Guardian Systems 9,822.47 30.00 60.00 HMM:ms cc: Jim Flynn ADMINISTRATOR NELSON FURTHER EXPLAINED THAT THE REASON THE GUARDIAN SYSTEM IS HIGHER IS THAT THEY PUT EVERYTHING IN CONDIUT, WHICH ACTUALLY IS BETTER. HE FELT THAT ANYTHING LARGER THAN A LARGE DOG WILL PROBABLY TRIGGER THE ALARM. COMMISSIONER FLETCHER STATED AS HE UNDERSTOOD IT, THIS WILL COST $9,000, PLUS $90 A MONTH FOR THE REST OF OUR LIVES, AND HE RECOMMENDED THE BOARD GET A GOOD GUARD DOG TO PUT OUT THERE TO SUPPLE— MENT THE TWO NEIGHBORS ALREADY THERE. COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK FELT THAT WE NEED MORE HISTORY ON THIS SITUATION. ADMINISTRATOR NELSON WAS OF THE OPINION THIS SECURITY SYSTEM IS NEEDED AND WARRANTED AND POINTED OUT THAT THEY DID BUDGET FOR IT. COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK ASKED FOR FIGURES SHOWING THE TOTAL LOSS FOR THEFT OR VANDALISM DURING THE LAST YEAR, BUT COMMISSIONER BIRD NOTED THAT WOULD NOT MEAN THAT YOU COULD NOT HAVE A BIG LOSS THE NEXT MONTH. COMMISSIONER WODTKE NOTED THAT WE HAVE MILLIONS OF DOLLARS OF EQUIPMENT AND INVENTORY AT THIS LOCATION, WHICH IS IN AN AREA QUITE DEC 171980 m oo� 45 PAcF 483 I DEC 171980 a0©K 45 FAGF 484 SUSCEPTIBLE TO THEFT AND VANDALISM. HE BELIEVED WE NEED TO TAKE STEPS TO HAVE ADEQUATE SECURITY, AND DID NOT THINK WE CAN RELY ON A PERSON LIVING THERE TO GIVE US FULL SECURITY ON A 24 HOUR BASIS, BUT HE DID NOT HAVE ANY PROBLEM WITH WAITING FOR A FURTHER REPORT ON THE SITUATION, CHAIRMAN LYONS INSTRUCTED THAT FURTHER DISCUSSION ON SECURITY FOR THE COUNTY BARN BE DEFERRED TO ANOTHER AGENDA WHEN WE CAN HAVE A FURTHER REPORT ON THE LIVE-IN SITUATION. DELEGATION OF TRAVEL PERMISSION NELSON: THE BOARD REVIEWED THE FOLLOWING MEMO FROM ADMINISTRATOR 64 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WILLARD W. SIEBERT. JR.. Chairman ALMA LEE LOY. Vice Chairman WILLIAM C. WODTKE, JR. R. DON DEESON PATRICK B. LYONS v N'll A. NELSON, Administrator 2345 14th Avenue (Lawyer's Title Bldg.) Vero Beach, Florida 329: December 1, 1980 MEMORANDUM TO: Board of County Commissioners FROM: Neil A. Nelson, County Administrator SUBJECT: Delegation of Travel Permission My office has researched the Florida Statutes for determination of authority to allow budgeted authorized employee travel. 1. Paragraph 112.061 (2) (A) specifies the County as a legal agency of the state. 2. Paragraph 112.061 (2) (B) specifies the agency head as the highest policy-making authority of a public authority or, in our case, the Board of County Commissioners. 3. Paragraph 112.061 (3) (A) specifies, "All travel must be authorized and approved by the head of the agency, or his designated representative, from whose funds the traveler is paid." The sub -paragraph continues, "In every instance, prior to the approval, the head of the agency may request a signed statement by the traveler's supervisor, stating that such travel is on the official business of the state and also stating the purpose of such travel." Based on the above information, I request the following action by the Board of County Commissioners: As the designated representative of the Board, allow me to authorize official travel of career classification personnel of the County with the following provisions: 1. Appropriate explanation of the travel, signed by me, appears on the travel voucher. 2. The Board shall be notified of request approvals at the next scheduled Board of County Commissioner's meeting after said travel has been performed. Nei A. Nelson County Administrator NAN:ms DEC 171980 65 am, 45 PAGE 485 --1 _I DEC 171980 Eaux 45 pAcF 4'86 ADMINISTRATOR NELSON STATED THAT HIS THOUGHT WAS THAT AT THE COMMISSION MEETING FOLLOWING ANY TRAVEL REQUEST, HE COULD INFORM THE BOARD OF ANY TRAVEL HE HAD APPROVED. HE EXPLAINED THAT HE IS REFERRING PRIMARILY TO TRAVEL THAT IS BUDGETED FOR AND IS TO AUTHORIZED MEETINGS. HE FELT THIS IS MORE OF AN ADMINISTRATIVE MATTER. COMMISSIONER BIRD SUGGESTED THAT THE ADMINISTRATOR JUST LIST THIS UNDER HIS MATTERS ON EACH AGENDA, AND IF THE BOARD HAS ANY QUESTION, THEY CAN THEN BRING THEM UP. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER BIRD, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR AND AUTHORIZED HIM TO APPROVE TRAVEL THAT HAS BEEN BUDGETED, AS PER HIS MEMO OF DECEMBER 1ST, WITH THE CHANGE IN THE BOTTOM PARAGRAPH OF SAID MEMO AS FOLLOWS: 'BOARD WILL BE NOTIFIED AT THE NEXT SCHEDULED MEETING AFTER APPROVAL HAS BEEN GIVEN." DISCUSSION RE FURNITURE FOR .JUDGES' OFFICES CHAIRMAN LYONS INQUIRED ABOUT THE NECESSITY TO ACT ON THIS ITEM THIS AFTERNOON, AND ADMINISTRATOR NELSON EMPHASIZED THAT TO BE ABLE TO ORDER AND GET THIS FURNITURE HERE AT THE ESTIMATED COMPLETION DATE, IT DOES REQUIRE IMMEDIATE ATTENTION. HE STATED THAT HE HAS BEEN WORKING VERY CLOSELY WITH THE .JUDGES, A NUMBER OF WHOM ARE USING THEIR OWN PERSONAL FURNITURE; HIS LIST HAS BEEN STAFFED THROUGH ALL THE CIRCUIT .JUDGES AND THE COUNTY .JUDGE AND CHECKED BY THE PURCHASING DIRECTOR, AND FOUND TO BE ACCURATE. THE ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDED APPROVAL AND INFORMED THE BOARD THAT THERE IS A CONTINGENCY FUND TO COVER THIS PURPOSE - $300,000 WAS ALLOCATED FOR FURNITURE AND EQUIPMENT. MEMO AND LIST ARE AS FOLLOWS: �r 15, 1980 To: County Administrator From: Director of Material Subject: Furniture 1. Attached is a consolidated list of furniture requested by Judge Smith that will be required upon completion of the renovation of the Courthouse. 2. The majority of this furniture will be ordered from existing Florida State Contracts. It is therefore requested that I receive authorization to order this furniture because of the 60-90 day delivery time involved. l Jim Flyn " ITEM QUANTITY COST TOTAL Chair - Wood side, all fabric 4 114.31 457.24 Side chair without arms, all vinyl 60 64.83 3889.80 Table - conference 1 545.00 545.00 Table - conference 1 320.00 320.00 Table --conference 6 195.00 1170.00 Table - work 8 150.00 1560.00 Credenza - 2 cabinet style 1 280.00 280.00 Desk - secretarial, single pedestal 1 342.04 342.04 Desk - secretarial, single pedestal 1 342.04 342.04 Desk -general purpose, double pedestal 2 326.00 652.00 Chair - wood, executive, swivel posture 1 156.40 156.40 Chair - wood, executive swivel, fixed full back 1 144.22 144.22 Chair, wood, swivel, w/arms 21 124.65 2617.65 LOCAL PURCHASE End -tables 4 Est. 60.00 240.00 Coffee table 1 Est. 60.00 60.00 Small sofas 2 Est.175.00 350.00 Podiums 2 Est.190.00 380.00 Chair mat 1 Est. 25.00 25.00 Blinds & Drapes, etc. Est.650.00 650.00 Other Misc. Items Est.700.00 700.00 Total 14881.39 DEC 171980 �oo�c 45 Pd1E 4� 67 7 606X 45 PAcE 488 QUESTION AROSE ABOUT THE ADDITIONAL ROOMS TO BE FILLED WITH THIS FURNITURE, AND ADMINISTRATOR NELSON EXPLAINED THAT WHERE BEFORE WE HAD TWO CIRCUIT COURT OFFICES IN THE COURTHOUSE, WE NOW WILL HAVE FIVE OFFICES ON THE SECOND FLOOR AT THE SOUTH END; THE .JUDGES PRESENTLY OCCUPYING AN OFFICE IN THE 2001 BUILDING AND IN THE MODULAR BUILDING BY THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION BUILDING WILL BE MOVING INTO THE COURTHOUSE. COMMISSIONER BIRD ASKED IF THIS TAKES CARE OF ALL THE FURNITURE REQUIRED IN THE AREA UPSTAIRS SOUTH OF THE COURTROOMS. ADMINISTRATOR NELSON STATED THAT AS FAR AS HE CAN TELL, THIS WILL SATISFY THE JUDGES; HE NOTED THAT THE CLERK, FREDA WRIGHT, IS WORKING ON HER LIST RIGHT NOW. COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK ASKED IF THIS IS AN APPROPRIATE DOLLAR AMOUNT BECAUSE HE NOTED THAT SOME OF THESE ARE ESTIMATES. COMMISSIONER WODTKE FELT THE AMOUNT ESTIMATED FOR BLINDS AND DRAPERIES WAS CONSIDERABLY LOW FOR THE OFFICES, AND ADMINISTRATOR NELSON FELT THESE ARE MEANT PRIMARILY FOR THE STOREFRONT DOORS AT THE ENTRANCE TO THE AREA. COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK ASKED IF WE HAVE A PLACE TO STORE THIS FURNITURE IF THE OFFICES ARE NOT COMPLETED ON TIME, AND THE ADMINISTRATOR STATED THAT IT COULD BE PUT IN THE WAREHOUSE. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BIRD, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED THE LIST SUBMITTED FOR FURNITURE FOR THE .JUDGES' OFFICES, NOT TO EXCEED A TOTAL OF $15,000. STATUS OF DISCUSSION WITH FLORIDA LAND COMPANY ATTORNEY COLLINS REPORTED THAT HE AND CHAIRMAN LYONS MET WITH JIM CLARK, PRESIDENT OF FLORIDA LAND COMPANY, AND HIS ATTORNEY, STEVE HENDERSON, AND BASICALLY REVIEWED THE PROBLEM AREAS. SINCE THAT TIME, MR. HENDERSON HAS HAD A CHANCE TO DISCUSS THIS SITUATION WITH HIS CLIENT, AND HE HAS WRITTEN A LETTER AS FOLLOWS: 68 71�. LARRY B ALEXANDER DEORGE H. BAILEY ROBIN A. BLANTON *.CHESTER BREWER. JR DAVID A. CAIRNS JAMES R COLE MARGARET L. COOPER ® JEAN( CRIPPCN CHARLES H. DAMSEL. JR. L.M^RTIN rLANAGAN WILLIAM A. rOST(R MARJORIC D• GAE,ARIAN 1.^E)DCUS D. HARTMAN HAYWARD D.GA♦ STEVC L.HENDERSON THORNTON M. HENRY THEODORE W. HERZOG PETER S. HOLTON R. BRUCE JONES THOMAS A. KOVAL CLON70N W. LANIER ROBIN A, LLOYD STEVEN ^.LONG JOHN BLAIR MCCRACKEN $. CAROL -CLEAN GEORGE H. MOSS December 15, 1980 MrMHERs Or JONES b rUSTER. P. A ATTOFINLY5 ^NU COUN�LLOFII', 1117 fIEAC.HE.ANO ROULEVARD P O IIOK 3406 VLNO 13LAC/1, rLONIDA 324060 (30!.) 231-1900 PATRICK M. O'"ARA RICHARD J. OLACK ARTHUR P. PUMPTAN C. BROOKS RICCA, JR. CHRISTOPHER J. SCHILLING ROBERT L. SELLARS SIDNEY A. STUBBS, JR. GEORGE P. SUPRAN ALLEN R.YOMLINSON EVERETT J. VAN GAASBECK PAUL C. WOLF#. Geor(ie G. Collins, Jr., Esquire 744 Reachland Boulevard Vero Beach, Florida 32960 Deer Joe: w( ST PAI. f" .. .. ., I i J ,NrS r. 11. ., ., V A f L A I. l i [. w1 st VAIN n1At • TTuiB 11OS t,' f ..t, 9 As I advised your secretary, Jim Clark was called back to- Orlaudo early this afternoon and was unable to attend the 4:00 o'clock meeting. We are now in a position to formalize a possible solution to this deadlock which might be of some interest to the County Commission. Since it has become apparent that the County may be concerned about the R-2 zoning and the densities allowed thereunder, Florida Land would be willing to submit to an administrative re- zoning of the R-2 property to R -2B allowing eight units to an acre and thus capping permitted densities on the entire project to 672 units (as opposed to 1020 units). Concurrent with that rezoning, the County would begin proc- essing of the River Bend site plan and request for conceptual approval with the understanding that if the site plan and conceptual -plans came up for approval prior to the rezoning bein(J completed, the site plan could be approved subject to the rezoning. Florida Land Company would further agree that in the event an application for site plan and/or conceptual approval on the project known as "Beach Colony" was ever filed, Florida Land Company would acknowledge that it would be in doubt as to whether Beach Colony, on its own, or in conjunction with River Bend, constituted a DRI and would take appropriate steps to apply for a binding letter of interpretation. Finally, upon confirmation that neither the Planning Director nor the Planning Board would raise the DRI binding letter as a prerequisite to site plan and conceptual approval, the law suit filed against the County, et al, would be dismissed with prejudice. We would also agree to execute a release of the County and Mr. Rever from any liability for civil damages that might have accrued. DEC 171980 69 BDOr F�,489 r �r BOOK 45 PxA90 I understand that Pat is going to report back to the Commission on Vlednesday. While I am aware that the Board does not like to hear any unscheduled items, I would like to have some time to address the County Commission on Wednesday concerning this. Jim Clark will make arrangements to be at the Commission meeting in order to explain to the Board Florida Land's posi- tion on this matter. Kindest regards, JONES, FOSTER & MOSS By Steve L. Henderson kfw Hand Deliver ATTORNEY HENDERSON CONFIRMED THAT THEY WILL REZONE THE PROPERTY TO R -2B AND REQUESTED THAT THE COUNTY START PROCESSING THEIR APPLICATION CONDITIONED UPON SUCH A REZONING AND WITH THE ASSURANCE THAT THE DEVELOPER IS PREPARED TO SUBMIT ANY REASONABLE IMPACT INFORMATION THE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION WOULD WANT. HE FURTHER CONFIRMED THAT IF THE APPLICATION IS STARTED IN THE PROCESS AND THE DEVELOPER HAS SOME REASONABLE ASSURANCE THAT THE DRI ISSUE WOULD NOT BE RAISED AGAIN, THEY WOULD STOP THE LITIGATION AGAINST THE COUNTY. DISCUSSION FOLLOWED REGARDING AN OVERALL DENSITY OF H UNITS PER ACRE, AND ATTORNEY HENDERSON STATED THAT MR. CLARK, PRESIDENT OF FLORIDA LAND COMPANY, HAS INDICATED THAT AS ACTUAL DEVELOPMENT TAKES PLACE, THIS MAY BE CHANGED TO AN EVEN LESSER DENSITY. MR. CLARK DISCUSSED THE DENSITY CAP, NOTING THAT BENT PINE IS A GOOD EXAMPLE OF MARKET PLANNING CONDITIONED ON ZONING, AND IT HAS EXACTLY THE SAME DENSITY AS A PORTION OF THIS PROJECT. HE NOTED THAT ONE OF THE PROJECTS THE BOARD APPROVED TODAY HAD A DENSITY OF ABOUT 1.8 IN AN AREA WHERE 8 WAS ALLOWABLE. MR. CLARK EXPLAINED THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO KEEP FLEXIBILITY IN ORDER TO BE ABLE TO HAVE MORE UNITS IN ONE AREA THAN IN ANOTHER POSSIBLY, AND POINTED OUT THAT THIS FLEXIBILITY IS NEEDED BECAUSE THE BEACH PROPERTY IS VERY EXPENSIVE, AND ALSO, THE ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS RELATING TO THE RIVERSIDE AND THE BEACH ITSELF WHICH TAKE UP EVEN ADDITIONAL SPACE MUST BE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION. 70 CHAIRMAN LYONS ASKED IF THEIR APPLICATION IS FOR A SMALL NUMBER OF UNITS OR THE WHOLE PROJECT. ATTORNEY HENDERSON EXPLAINED THAT THEY HAVE FILED AN APPLICATION WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT SEEKING A CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL ON THE PROJECT AS A WHOLE. THE FIRST SITE PLAW IS JUST THE FIRST PHASE; IT IS PART OF AN OVERALL PACKAGE AND THEY NEED APPROVAL ON THE CONCEPT IN ORDER TO PROCEED WITH FUTURE PLANNING. MR. CLARK STATED THEY HAVE THREE ITEMS THAT WILL REQUIRE CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL ® A WATER AND SEWER SYSTEM WHICH MUST BE SIZED PROPERLY AND CONSTRUCTED BEFORE THEY CAN ASK FOR CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY; A PROPOSED 100' MARINA IN RELATION TO WHICH A VERY INVOLVED HYDROLOGY STUDY AND AN ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY HAS BEEN DONE; AND THEY ARE ASKING FOR DETAIL APPROVAL ON TWO PLUS ACRES. COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK NOTED THAT THE WASTE WATER TREATMENT PLANT IS PLANNED -TO BE CAPABLE OF HANDLING THE ENTIRE PROJECT AND - WISHED TO KNOW IF THIS FITS IN WITH PHASING DOWN TO 6 UNITS PER ACRE. MR. CLARK REPORTED THAT IN THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT, THEY PLAN TO EXPAND THE PLANT, PROBABLY TWICE. HE CONTINUED THAT THE LOCATION OF THE PLANT HAS BEEN FIXED ON THEIR PLAN; THE DATA HAS BEEN REVIEWED AND TESTED; THEY HAVE A LETTER FROM THE COUNTY ON THAT PARTICULAR FRANCHISE APPLICATION AND CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL FROM THE COUNTY UTILITY DIRECTOR; AND THEY HAVE RECEIVED A CONSUMPTIVE USE PERMIT FROM ST. JOHN'S WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT FOR ABOUT TWO TIMES THE AMOUNT OF WATER THEY NEED, WHICH WILL BE OBTAINED FROM A DEEP ARTESIAN WELL ON SITE. MR. CLARK NOTED THAT WHAT THEY REALLY ARE ASKING THE COUNTY TO DO TODAY IS TO GET STARTED WITH THE REVIEW OF THEIR APPLICATION. ATTORNEY COLLINS COMMENTED THAT ONLY THE COUNTY COMMISSION HAS THE POWER TO GIVE A VESTED CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL, AND UNTIL THE SITE PLANS ARE FINAL, HE DID NOT FEEL THE WHOLE PROJECT COULD BE ADDRESSED. HE NOTED THAT THIS ACTION WAS LAID BEFORE THE BOARD BECAUSE OF ACTION OF THE PLANNING DIRECTOR, AND HE FELT IT IS STILL THE PLANNING DTRECTOR'S DECISION AS TO WHETHER HE IS GOING TO REQUIRE A BINDING LETTER. DEC 171980 71 pp - DEC 17190 pox 45 PAo. E492 PLANNING DIRECTOR REVER COMMENTED THAT IF THEY ACTUALLY DO APPLY TO LOWER THE DENSITY TO S UNITS PER ACRE, ALTHOUGH IT IS NOT THE DENSITY WE ARE WORKING TOWARDS ON THE PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, IT IS MUCH MORE FAVORABLE THAN THE PRESENT DENSITY, AND IF THE APPLICANT WANTED TO PROCEED ON THAT BASIS IN CONJUNCTION WITH SUPPLY- ING ADDITIONAL LOCAL IMPACT INFORMATION RE TRAFFIC, DRAINAGE, ETC., HE WAS WILLING TO GO AHEAD AND START THE PROCESS FOR HIS STAFF TO COMPLETE THEIR TASK OF REVIEWING AND MAKING A RECOMMENDATION TO THE COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK NOTED THAT WITH THE CONCEPT WE ARE DEVELOPING AND THE BARRIER ISLAND STUDY TO HELP US MAKE A REASONABLE DECISION ABOUT CAPACITY, OBVIOUSLY THERE IS A TOTAL NUMBER WE ARE GOING TO END UP WITH. HE BELIEVED IF WE ALLOW S UNITS PER ACRE, THAT LIMITS THE AVAILABILITY OF THE REST OF THE LAND TO BE DEVELOPED, AND HE ASKED WHY MR. REVER DIDN'T REQUEST THE DEVELOPER TO ADHERE TO 6 UNITS PER ACRE, PLANNING DIRECTOR REVER STATED THAT HE WAS NOT INVOLVED IN THE NEGOTIATIONS, BUT HE BELIEVED THAT DOWN THE ROAD, FUTURE DEVELOP- MENT PLANS MAY REFLECT A LOWER DENSITY IN ANY EVENT. HE STATED THAT IT WAS HIS UNDERSTANDING THAT ONCE WE ADOPT THE MASTER PLAN, STATE LAW REQUIRED THAT THE COUNTY, IN THE MOST EXPEDITIOUS MANNER POSSIBLE, ADOPT METHODS THAT WOULD IMPLEMENT THE PLAN, AND HE FELT THIS OBLIGATES US TO IMPLEMENT THE PLAN IN CONFORMITY. HE REITERATED THAT WHAT THEY HAVE ACCOMPLISHED IS A GREAT STRIDE FORWARD, AND HE WAS WILLING TO WORK WITH THAT IF THE BOARD DESIRES. HE NOTED THAT THIS WOULD ONLY INVOLVE THE SITE PLAN FOR 11 UNITS AT THIS TIME. COMMISSIONER WODTKE DID NOT SEE HOW WE CAN EXPECT A DEVELOPER TO SAY THAT 6 UNITS PER ACRE WILL BE FINE WHEN WE DON'T KNOW AT THIS POINT WHAT WE -ARE GOING TO END UP WITH ON OUR PLAN. HE CONTINUED THAT WHEN WE SAY S, WE HAVE TO REMEMBER THAT IS A CAP OF 8 AND WITH THE ROADS, SETBACKS, ETC., IT ACTUALLY WORKS OUT TO LESS, HE WENT ON TO DISCUSS THE NEED FOR FLEXIBILITY IN THE ZONING AND FELT THAT IN ORDER I" TO PROTECT THEMSELVES AND HAVE THE FLEXIBILITY THEY WILL NEED, THE DEVELOPER WILL HAVE TO GO TO A DENSITY OF S TO HAVE A FEASIBLE PROJECT IN THE WAY THEY WANT TO HAVE IT. ATTORNEY HENDERSON AGREED THAT IT IS A MATTER OF BEING ALLOWED TO GO TO THE DENSITY OF S TO ACCOMPLISH AN OVERALL DEVELOPMENT AT LESS THAN THAT. HE NOTED THAT JOHN'S ISLAND WHICH IS DEVELOPED AT AN OVERALL DENSITY OF 3 TO 4, HAS A DENSITY IN PARTS OF 12 TO 15. COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK ASKED IF THEY WOULD BE WILLING TO COMMIT TO AN OVERALL DENSITY OF 6, AND ATTORNEY HENDERSON NOTED THAT THE COUNTY DOES NOT HAVE THE ORDINANCE SET UP TO ACCOMPLISH THAT. PLANNING DIRECTOR REVER FELT THE ZONING ORDINANCE AS NOW CONSTITUTED WILL ACCOMPLISH JUST THAT. HE BELIEVED THAT SUBDIVISIONS ARE BEING CONFUSED WITH SITE PLANNING. MR. REVER NOTED THAT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT COULD WORK WITH THEM ON THE OVERALL DENSITY ON MULTI -FAMILY UNITS, WHICH HAVE MUCH GREATER FLEXIBILITY BECAUSE YOU HAVE JUST ONE LOT LINE WHICH IS THE BOUNDARY OF THE PROPERTY. WHEN YOU HAVE TO WORK WITH LOT LINES IN SUBDIVISIONS, YOU ARE RESTRICTED. IT WAS MR. REVERS CONTENTION THAT THE DESIRED DEVELOPMENT COULD BE ACCOMPLISHED AT A DENSITY OF 6. ATTORNEY HENDERSON STATED THAT HE WAS CONFUSED - HE NOTED THEY ARE CONTEMPLATING A SERIES OF SITE PLANS, AND IF THEY HAVE A SITUATION WHERE AREAS OF THE PROJECT NOT YET REVIEWED BY SITE PLAN WERE NOT GOING TO BE DEVELOPED BECAUSE OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROBLEMS, WOULD THAT MEAN THEY COULD GO TO A DENSITY OF PERHAPS 10 IN ORDER TO MAKE UP FOR NOT USING THAT AREA? PLANNING DIRECTOR REVER STATED THAT WAS WHY HE ASKED FOR THE CONCEPTUAL PLAN BECAUSE ALTHOUGH IT IS NOT THE SAME AS A FORMALLY APPROVED PLAN, IT DOES ESTABLISH THE OVERALL CONCEPT AND DOES ALLOW YOU TO THEN COME BACK AND REFLECT AGAINST THAT. HE STATED THAT IS HOW HE HAS BEEN HANDLING OTHER SITUATIONS TO GIVE THE FLEXIBILITY. ATTORNEY HENDERSON FELT THAT THIS ACTUALLY IS AN INFORMAL PUD CONCEPT. DEC 171980 73 BOOK 45 FACE 493 DEC 171980 Bou 45 PAVE 494 CONSIDERABLE DISCUSSION CONTINUED IN REGARD TO OVERALL DENSITIES, AND MR. CLARK POINTED OUT THAT THE BOARD MIGHT FIND AFTER THE BARRIER ISLAND STUDY IS CONCLUDED THAT THE ISLAND CAN SUPPORT MORE THAN 6 UNITS PER ACRE, AND IF THAT WERE S0, THEIR PROJECT, HAVING BEEN COMPLETED, WOULD BE IMPINGED UPON. COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK FELT THAT THE ISLAND WILL SUPPORT WHATEVER WE CHOOSE WITH THE BENEFIT OF TECHNOLOGY, BUT NOTED THAT A FUGURE OF 6 IS WHAT WOULD BE ACCEPTED IN THIS COMMUNITY. MR. CLARK EMPHASIZED THAT THEY JUST ARE TRYING TO GET IN A POSITION TO HAVE THEIR PLANS ON THE TABLE TO BE REVIEWED, AND HE HOPED THAT THEIR PROPOSAL TO REZONE WOULD BE TAKEN AS AN INDICATION OF THEIR INTENTIONS. CHAIRMAN LYONS, FOR THE RECORD, WISHED TO INDICATE THAT THEY DID TRY TO GET MR. CLARK TO REZONE TO 6, BUT SO FAR HAVE MADE NO PROGRESS, HE NOTED THAT ATTORNEY COLLINS HAS MADE THE POINT THAT THE PLANNING DIRECTOR TURNED DOWN THE APPLICATION AND ACTUALLY THE QUESTION CONFRONTING THE COMMISSION IS WHAT DO WE DO TO BACK UP THE PLANNING DIRECTOR. ATTORNEY COLLINS DID NOT FEEL ANY FORMAL ACTION SHOULD COME FROM THE COMMISSION. HE NOTED THAT THE PURPOSE OF THIS MEETING WAS TO GET ALL PARTIES INVOLVED, AND THE PLANNING DIRECTOR STILL HAS THE DECISION TO MAKE. HE FELT THAT WITH THE INPUT MR. REVER NOW HAS RECEIVED, HE WOULD BE GUIDED ACCORDINGLY. ATTORNEY COLLINS NEXT ASKED MR. CLARK WHEN HE IS TALKING ABOUT AN APPLICATION FOR REZONING WHETHER HE WAS TALKING ABOUT BEACH COLONY AND IF SO, WHETHER HE HAS AUTHORITY FROM THE PRESENT OWNERS. MR. CLARK CONFIRMED THAT HE WAS AND THAT THEY ARE ACTING AS AN AGENT BOTH FOR THE PRESENT OWNERS AND FUTURE OWNERS. ATTORNEY COLLINS NOTED THAT THERE IS A PIECE OF PROPERTY IN BETWEEN BEACH COLONY AND RIVER BEND, AND MR. CLARK STATED THAT THEY DO NOT HAVE ANY CONTROL OVER THAT 15 ACRES. MR. CLARK STATED THAT THERE ARE 84 ACRES IN RIVER BEND - 16 EAST OF AIA AND THE BALANCE ON THE WEST. HE CONTINUED THAT BEACH COLONY IS TO BE AN ENTIRELY DIFFERENT CONCEPT AND IS TO BE A VERY HIGH VALUE PROJECT, AT LEAST COMPARABLE T0, IF NOT BETTER THAN, JOHNS ISLAND. ATTORNEY COLLINS COMMENTED THAT THE COMMISSION, SOME MEETINGS AGO, AUTHORIZED THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND ATTORNEYS TO WORK ON A DRAFT OF A SITE PLAN ORDINANCE AND ESTABLISH A THRESHOLD TO HELP THE COUNTY IN DEALING WITH LARGE PROJECTS. HE STATED THAT HE WOULD WELCOME FLORIDA LAND COMPANY'S INPUT INTO THE FORMATION OF THIS ORDINANCE. CHAIRMAN LYONS ASKED MR. CLARK IF THE BOARD WERE TO GO AHEAD ON RIVER BEND, AND IN THE MEANTIME THIS ORDINANCE WERE ADOPTED, WHETHER HE WOULD BE AMENABLE TO COMING UNDER SUCH AN ORDINANCE IF THE THRESHOLD WERE SUCH THAT THE COUNTY WOULD ASK FOR A BINDING LETTER. MR. CLARK NOTED THAT THEY WOULD COME UNDER THE LAW OF THE LAND, BUT VENTURED THE OPINION THAT THE LOCAL BOARD IS MORE QUALIFIED TO REVIEW THE LOCAL IMPACT DATA AND THAT THEY SHOULD KEEP LOCAL CONTROL. COMMISSIONER WODTKE STATED THAT, BASED UPON THE PRESENTATION MADE HERE TODAY, HE WOULD LIKE TO ENCOURAGE THE AGENT OR OWNERS TO APPLY FOR A REZONING OF THAT PROPERTY POST HASTE. DISCUSSION CONTINUED ABOUT A DENSITY OF S OPPOSED TO A DENSITY OF 6, AND COMMISSIONER WODTKE POINTED OUT THAT THE PLANNING DIRECTOR CANNOT MAKE ANY RECOMMENDATION UNTIL THE STAFF HAS AN OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW; HE, THEREFORE, FELT THAT WE ARE JUST SPINNING OUR WHEELS BECAUSE WE CANNOT TAKE ANY ACTION TODAY, AND THE PLANNING DIRECTOR IS WAITING FOR DIRECTION. COMMISSIONER BIRD STATED THAT HE WAS IN FAVOR OF MR. REVER PROCESSING THE APPLICATION, AND COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK STATED HE WAS AGAINST IT EXCEPT AT 6 UNITS AN ACRE. COMMISSIONER FLETCHER ALSO FAVORED THE LOWER DENSITY. MR, REVER COMMENTED THAT HE WAS HEARING THE BOARD SAY THAT WE SHOULD START WORKING WITH THEM AND THEN WHEN THE REZONING COMES UP, WE WILL SEE IF IT IS ACCEPTABLE OR NOT ACCEPTABLE. DEC 171980 75 8nax FACE5 DEC 1719 80 �oox 5 wE 496 COMMISSIONER WODTKE NOTED THAT FLORIDA LAND CO. HAS INDICATED THEY WILL INSTIGATE A REZONING TO R -2B, AND PROCESSING THE OVERALL PLAN WILL GIVE US AN OPPORTUNITY TO LOOK AT THAT. HE FELT THESE ARE SEPARATE ISSUES, BOTH OF WHICH ARE VERY IMPORTANT AND TOGETHER WILL MEAN A LOT MORE THAN SEPARATELY. ATTORNEY COLLINS AGREED AND NOTED THAT THERE ARE TWO THRESHOLDS - ONE WHEN PROCESSING IS STARTED AND ANOTHER WHEN REZONING IS STARTED. PLANNING DIRECTOR REVER STATED THAT H -IS DEPARTMENT WILL MAKE A RECOMMENDATION FOR THE BOARDS CONSIDERATION. ATTORNEY HENDERSON STATED THE DEVELOPERS POSITION - THEY ARE WILLING TO REZONE IF THE PLANNING DIRECTOR COMMENCES THE PROCESS. THEY DO NOT WANT TO FACE THE DRI QUESTION WHEN THEY GET BEFORE THE ZONING BOARD BECAUSE IT WILL ONLY CREATE ANOTHER TWO MONTHS DELAY. COMMISSIONER FLETCHER STATED, AS HE UNDERSTOOD IT, MR. REVER HAS REQUESTED THAT THEY GO TO A DRI, AND ATTORNEY HENDERSON ANSWERED THAT THE PLANNING DIRECTOR REQUESTED A BINDING LETTER. IF THIS REQUIREMENT IS DROPPED, THE SUIT WILL BE DROPPED. THEY DO NOT WANT THIS REQUIREMENT TO POP UP AGAIN ON RIVER BEND ONLY WHEN THEY GET TO THE ZONING BOARD BECAUSE IT WOULD BE A LOT OF MONEY AND EFFORT DOWN THE DRAIN AND THEY WOULD BE BACK TO SQUARE ONE. CHAIRMAN LYONS STATED HE FELT MR. REVER HAD DONE THE RIGHT THING AND THAT NOW HE SHOULD DECIDE WHAT THE NEXT RIGHT THING IS. CAROLYN EGGERT, CHAIRMAN OF THE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION, ASSUMED THAT COMMISSION STILL HAS THE RIGHT TO BRING UP THE DRI, AND ATTORNEY COLLINS STATED THAT IS CORRECT. APPOINTMENT OF REPRESENTATIVE TO COUNCIL ON AGING FOR 1981 ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER FLETCHER, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER BIRD, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTED RESOLUTION 80-135 APPOINTING DON C. SCURLOCK, .JR., AS THE COUNTY'S REPRESENTATIVE TO THE COUNCIL ON AGING BOARD OF DIRECTORS FOR 1981. 76 � RESOLUTION NO. 80-135 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, That DON C. SCURLOCK, JR. is hereby appointed as Indian River County's Representative on the Indian River County Council on Aging, Inc. to serve during the corporate year of 1981. Said Resolution shall become effective as of the 17th day of December 1980. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN,,R'TVER COUNTY, FLORIDA By— ''''""''�1;, trick B. Lyo ,/Chairman Attest:. � Freda Wright r 'C�erk DEC 171980x° 4'- Face497 I _I DEC 171980 45 PAGE �9� ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER BIRD, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED THE BONDS OF ROBERT F. BALLARD, FRAN 0. ROSS, AND CHARLES H. WALTERS, AS TRUSTEES OF THE INDIAN RIVER COUNTY HOSPITAL DISTRICT AND AUTHORIZED THE SIGNATURE OF THE MEMBERS OF THE BOARD. SAID BONDS ARE ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK. NEW STATIONERY FOR COUNTY COMMISSION OFFICES CHAIRMAN LYONS INFORMED THE BOARD THAT NEW STATIONERY HAS BEEN ORDERED AS PER SAMPLE IN THE PACKET. REQUEST FOR PUBLIC HEARING BY HARRIS SANITATION CO. CHAIRMAN LYONS REPORTED THAT HARRIS SANITATION CO. WISHES TO PROVIDE COMMERCIAL SANITATION ONLY FOR THE COUNTY. HE NOTED THAT WE HAVE OTHER SANITATION COMPANIES PROVIDING BOTH COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL SERVICE AND HE WANTED THE BOARDS OPINION AS TO WHETHER WE WANT TO GIVE HARRIS A PUBLIC HEARING OR TELL THEM WE DON'T WANT TO -BRING IN SOMEONE JUST FOR COMMERCIAL SERVICE. COMMISSIONER BIRD ASKED IF THE OTHER COMPANIES ARE WORKING UNDER FRANCHISE, AND IT WAS STATED THAT THEY ARE, COMMISSIONER FLETCHER FAVORED FREE ENTERPRISE AND WAS IN FAVOR OF LETTING THEM IN AND LET THEM BID. COMMISSIONER WODTKE NOTED THAT OUR FRANCHISES ARE NOT EXCLUSIVE FRANCHISES, BUT IT IS UP TO THE BOARD TO DETERMINE WHETHER THERE IS A NEED FOR ADDITIONAL SERVICE, HE CONTINUED THAT WE WENT THROUGH A PUBLIC HEARING TWO YEARS AGO WITH THE SAME COMPANY WHICH IS A SUBSIDIARY OF WASTE MANAGEMENT, HE HAD NO PROBLEM ABOUT GRANTING HARRIS SANITATION THE RIGHT TO COME AND PRESENT THEIR CASE AND THEN MAKING A DECISION BASED UPON PRESENTATION AND NEED, BUT HE DID FEEL VERY STRONGLY THAT IN THIS TYPE OF SERVICE THERE IS JUST SO MUCH BUSINESS THAT CAN BE DONE AND SOMETIMES TOO MANY FRANCHISE HOLDERS ARE DETRIMENTAL TO THOSE TRYING TO PROVIDE THE SERVICE. 78 COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK AGREED THAT ANYONE HAS THE RIGHT TO MAKE A PROPOSAL. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BIRD, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER FLETCHER, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY AUTHORIZED ADVERTISING A PUBLIC HEARING AS REQUESTED BY HARRIS SANITATION CO. MAIL FROM HEALTH PLANNING COUNCIL, INC._ CHAIRMAN LYONS COMMENTED THAT THE BOARD RECEIVED QUITE AN AMOUNT OF MAIL FROM THE HEALTH PLANNING PEOPLE AND FELT SOMEONE SHOULD BE ASSIGNED TO REVIEW IT. HE REQUESTED THAT COMMISSIONER BIRD PERUSE THE MAIL RECEIVED FROM THE HEALTH PLANNING COUNCIL TO SEE IF IT CONTAINS ANYTHING THAT SHOULD BE CALLED TO THE ATTENTION OF THE COMMISSION. REPRESENTATION WITH EMERGENCY_ SERVICES CHAIRMAN LYONS STATED THAT IF THE COMMISSION HAD NO OBJECTION, HE WOULD CONTINUE TO WORK IN THE AREA OF THE EMERGENCY SERVICES, SUCH AS THE AMBULANCE SQUADS. HE COMMENTED THAT THEY NOW HAVE FURTHER DISCUSSION IN THIS REGARD UNDER WAY WITH MAYOR NOLAN OF THE TOWN OF INDIAN RIVER SHORES AND WILL GO INTO THIS IN DETAIL AFTER THE FIRST OF THE YEAR. REPORT OF BEACH RESTORATION AND PRESERVATION COMMITTEE COMMISSIONER WODTKE, AS CHAIRMAN OF THE BEACH RESTORATION AND PRESERVATION COMMITTEE, REPORTED THAT HE HAD TALKED WITH A REPRESENTATIVE OF THE CROPS OF ENGINEERS, AND OUR REPORT IS NOW AT THE WASHINGTON LEVEL. HE NOTED THAT WE HAVE RECEIVED A LETTER ASKING FOR ADDITIONAL COMMENTS ON THE REPORT, AND HE WAS GOING TO BE HAVING A MEETING OF THE ADVISORY BOARD AND FELT IT WOULD BE BENEFICIAL IF A LETTER WERE WRITTEN TO THE PROPER AUTHORITIES ADVISING THEM OF THE COUNTY'S INVOLVEMENT AND WORK JOINTLY WITH THE CITY OF SERO BEACH TO INDICATE THAT WE ARE INTERESTED IN THE PROJECT AND ARE TRYING TO FORMALIZE RECOMMENDED PLANS OF SOME SORT. HE STATED THAT HE WAS DEC 171990 79 $oox 45 rAGE499 DEC 1'71990 sm 45 PAGE 500 GOING TO SEE IF:THE CORPS WOULD AUTHORIZE MR. HOBBS TO MEET WITH THE STUDY COMMITTEE THE WEEK OF .JANUARY 18TH AND HE WOULD ADVISE THE COMMISSION OF THE MEETING TIME AND DATE. COMMISSIONER FLETCHER EXPRESSED INTEREST IN ATTENDING. DISCUSSION RE FLEA MARKETS COMMISSIONER WODTKE DISCUSSED A POSSIBLE ORDINANCE IN REGARD TO FLEA MARKETS. HE COMMENTED THAT AT THE ONE SOUTH OF TOWN, THERE SEEMS TO BE CONSTRUCTION GOING ON ON A DAILY BASIS, AND THEY ALL SEEM TO HAVE PERMANENT VENDING SPOTS ARRANGED IN LITTLE STALLS. COMMISSIONER WODTKE WAS CONCERNED ABOUT COMPLIANCE WITH THE BUILDING CODES AND HAD A QUESTION ABOUT WHETHER THESE VENDORS ARE PAYING SALES TAX BECAUSE THERE IS A LOT OF FIRST LINE MERCHANDISE BEING OFFERED. HE EXPRESSED FURTHER CONCERN ABOUT THE NATURE IN WHICH THE ENTERPRISE IS GROWING AND THE TRAFFIC CONGESTION WHICH IS BUILDING UP AND SUGGESTED THAT THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT AND THE ZONING DEPART- MENT SHOULD DO SOME INVESTIGATING AND REPORT BACK TO THE BOARD. CHAIRMAN LYONS AGREED THAT WE OUGHT TO DO SOMETHING TO HAVE BETTER CONTROL THAN WE HAVE BECAUSE WE CERTAINLY DON T WANT TO END UP WITH A BUNCH OF SECOND CLASS BORDERLINE SHOPPING MALLS, WHICH REGULAR MERCHANTS MAKE THEIR STORE ON SATURDAYS AND SUNDAYS. COMMISSIONER WODTKE COMMENTED THAT IT IS WITHIN THE PURVIEW OF THE TAX COLLECTOR TO OVERSEE THE SALES TAX ISSUE, AND HE SUGGESTED WE TOUCH BASE WITH THE TAX COLLECTOR ON THIS. CHAIRMAN LYONS INSTRUCTED THE ADMINISTRATOR TO HAVE THE ZONING PEOPLE LOOK INTO THIS AND TO RAISE THE QUESTION WITH THE TAX COLLECTOR, DISCUSSION RE CENSUS COMMISSIONER WODTKE COMMENTED THAT HE WORKED CLOSELY ON THE CENSUS WITH THE IDTRECTOR FOR THIS DISTRICT AND HE WAS A BIT CONCERNED ABOUT THE PRELIMINARY COUNT BEING REPORTED AT AROUND 57,000. IN A DIRECT CONVERSATION WITH THE DIRECTOR, HE HAD THOUGHT THAT THE 80 m FINAL FIGURES WOULD BE SUBSTANTIALLY DIFFERENT, AND HE WOULD LIKE TO TRY TO LOCATE THE DIRECTOR AND GET FURTHER INFORMATION. CHAIRMAN LYONS REQUESTED THAT COMMISSIONER WODTKE DO WHAT- EVER HE COULD IN THIS REGARD. PASSING OF PAUL REDSTONE COMMISSIONER WODTKE REQUESTED THAT THE MINUTES REFLECT THE PASSING OF ONE OF THE PIONEERS OF OUR COUNTY - PAUL REDSTONE. HE NOTED THAT MR. RFDSTONE AND HIS FAMILY WERE VERY MUCH INVOLVED IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY. PRECIOUS METALS ORDINANCE COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK REPORTED THAT HE HAD BEEN INFORMED BY THE CITY ATTORNEY THAT THEY ARE STRENGTHENING THEIR PRECIOUS METALS ORDINANCE, AND HE FELT THE COUNTY SHOULD LOOK INTO THIS ALSO. ATTORNEY COLLINS STATED THAT THE CITY POLICE HAD CONTACTED HIM WITH A DRAFT OF ANOTHER ORDINANCE AND WHEN THE CITY HAS THEIRS DRAFTED, HE WILL BRING BACK AN ORDINANCE CONSISTENT WITH THE CITY'S FOR THE BOARD'S CONSIDERATION. PROPOSED ORDINANCE RE CREATION OF MOBILE HOME ADVISORY BOARD COMMISSIONER FLETCHER NOTED THAT HE HAD PASSED OUT TO THE BOARD MEMBERS FOR THEIR REVIEW COPIES OF A PROPOSED ORDINANCE WHICH THE ATTORNEY HAS ALREADY REVIEWED, AND HE WOULD NOW LIKE THE BOARD TO REVIEW IT. ATTORNEY COLLINS STATED THAT THE PURPOSE OF THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE IS TO SET UP A MOBILE HOME ADVISORY BOARD UNDER THE AUSPICES OF THE COUNTY; THAT BOARD WOULD HEAR COMPLAINTS AND TRY TO TAKE ACTION IN THE BEST INTERESTS OF THE RESIDENTS RESIDING IN THE MOBILE HOME. ATTORNEY COLLINS NOTED THAT IT SEEMS TO BE IN FAIRLY GOOD FORM AND IT SEEMS TO BE AN ISSUE OF WHETHER THE COMMISSION FEELS THERE IS A PROBLEM AND WHETHER COUNTY GOVERNMENT CAN ADDRESS THAT PROBLEM. DEC 171980 81 Boos 45 � PAE 501 I DEC 171900 sflox 45 PAcE502 COMMISSIONER FLETCHER STATED THAT HE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THIS BROUGHT UP AT THE NEXT REGULAR BOARD MEETING FOR ACTION AND TO INVITE THE PEOPLE FROM THE FEDERATION OF MOBILE HOME OWNERS TO BE PRESENT AT THAT TIME. DISCUSSION OF COUNTY ROAD MAINTENANCE COMMISSIONER FLETCHER STATED THAT HE HAD A PROBLEM REGARDING ROAD MAINTENANCE IN THE NORTH COUNTY AND SEVERAL GROUPS OF INDIVIDUALS HAVE COME TO HIM REGARDING BREVARD, WAUREGAN AND .JOSIE ROAD EXTENSIONS. THESE ROADS HAVE BEEN MAINTAINED IN THE PAST BY THE COUNTY, AND AS OF SOME FOUR WEEKS AGO, SOMEONE FROM THE COUNTY WENT OUT AND PLACED SOME RED MARKERS ON THE ROADS AND STATED THAT THE COUNTY WOULD NO LONGER MAINTAIN THESE ROADS BEYOND A CERTAIN POINT BECAUSE THEY WERE NOT PROPERLY ACCEPTED OR DEDICATED. COMMISSIONER FLETCHER CONTINUED THAT THIS SAME GROUP OF PEOPLE WHOSE MAINTENANCE HAS BEEN TERMINATED ALSO NOTED THAT COUNTY CREWS HAVE SPENT FOUR OR FIVE DAYS MOVING TREES AND USING GRADERS AND BULLDOZERS TO HAUL AND SPREAD SHELL TO BUILD A DEAD END ROAD IN FLORAVON SHORES. COMMISSIONER FLETCHER WISHED TO HAVE THE COUNTY POLICY IN REGARD TO ROAD BUILDING CLARIFIED. ADMINISTRATOR NELSON STATED THAT MR. DONLON, THE COUNTY RIGHT—OF—WAY MAN, WAS CARRYING OUT INSTRUCTIONS OF THE BOARD WHO DESIGNATED CERTAIN LIMITS AS TO WHAT WE WOULD MAINTAIN IN ROSELAND. HE NOTED THAT IN THE PAST MANY TIMES WE HAVE HAD GRADER OPERATORS WHO HAVE OPERATED BEYOND THE LIMITS THEY SHOULD HAVE. IN REGARD TO FLORAVON SHORES — THIS WAS AN OLDER, 1954 SUBDIVISION, PLATTED BACK BEFORE WE HAD REQUIREMENTS FOR ASPHALT TYPE ROADS. THE ROAD WAS PUT IN IN A SUBSTANDARD MANNER BACK THEN TO GET THE DEVELOPMENT ACCEPTED, AND IT WAS ACCEPTED FOR MAINTENANCE IN 1954. THE ADMINIS— TRATOR CONTINUED THAT IT HAS BEEN THE POLICY IN THE PAST NOT TO MAINTAIN SUCH ROADS AS LONG AS NO HOMES WERE BEING BUILT, BUT WHEN A PERSON BUILDS ON SUCH A ROAD, WE HAVE TO GO IN AND MAINTAIN IT FROM THERE ON OUT. HE AGREED THAT THEY DID REMOVE TREES WHICH HAD GROWN UP IN THE RIGHT—OF—WAY OVER THE YEARS, AND NOTED THAT WE HAVE 82 SIMILAR SITUATIONS IN OTHER OLD SUBDIVISIONS AND HAVE A LOT TO FACE, THE ADMINISTRATOR STATED THAT THE COUNTY CREW WAS CORRECT IN PUTTING THE ROAD IN FLORAVON SHORES BECAUSE IT IS AN ACCEPTED COUNTY ROAD, COMMISSIONER FLETCHER DID NOT QUESTION THAT THIS WAS CORRECT OR NOT, BUT QUESTIONED WHETHER THE COUNTY HAS THE FINANCIAL WHEREWITHAL OR SHOULD BE INVOLVED IN BUILDING ROADS THAT WERE PLATTED IN 1954, HIS CONCERN WAS THAT THERE ARE THREE ROADS IN ROSELAND TODAY - BREVARD, WAUREGAN AND JOSIE, THAT HAVE BEEN MAINTAINED AND GRADED FOR THE PAST NINE YEARS, AND THESE NOW HAVE BEEN TERMINATED. ADMINISTRATOR NELSON DID NOT KNOW TO WHAT EXTENT WE HAVE BEEN GRADING AND MAINTAINING THOSE ROADS, BUT REPORTED THAT HE DOES HAVE A MAP STATING THE LIMITS WE ARE TO GRADE, AND HE WOULD BE HAPPY TO EXTEND THE LIMITS IF THE BOARD SO DESIRES. ATTORNEY COLLINS STATED THAT HE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THE ADMINISTRATOR REVIEW THE MAPS AND MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD IN THIS REGARD, BUT IN THE MEANTIME, HE FELT THE COUNTY SHOULD NOT MAINTAIN ANYTHING THAT WE DO NOT HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO MAINTAIN. THE ATTORNEY REQUESTED THAT THE BOARD BE GIVEN A REPORT ON THE CONDITION OF THE ROADS DISCUSSED BY COMMISSIONER FLETCHER, RESOLUTIONS OF COMMENDATION - 80-129 80-136 80-137 COMMISSIONER FLETCHER NOTED THAT RESOLUTION 80-129 ACCEPTING HAROLD WINKLER°S RESIGNATION FROM THE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION AND COMMENDING HIM FOR HIS SERVICE ON SAID BOARD WAS ADOPTED AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF DECEMBER 3. 1980, AND HE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE RESOLUTIONS OF COMMENDATION FOR .JANET PORTER AND ELIZABETH REID, WHO VOLUNTEERED THEIR TIME AND SERVICES TO TAKING MINUTES OF THE MEETINGS OF THE NORTH INDIAN RIVER COUNTY FIRE STUDY COMMITTEE AND ADVISORY ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER FLETCHER, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER BIRD, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTED RESOLUTION 80-136 HONORING JANET PORTER AS ABOVE. DEC 171950 83 aoax 45 PACE 503' DEC 171980 45 PAPF504 ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER FLETCHER, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER BIRD, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTED RESOLUTION 80-137 HONORING ELIZABETH REID AS ABOVE. SAID RESOLUTIONS ARE HEREBY MADE A PART OF THE RECORD. OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA `~ WHEREAS, HAROLD WINKLER was appointed by the Board.of County 7) Pommissioners of Indian River County, Florida, to serve as a member of the Indian River County Planning and Zoning Conunission on ' 7Tune 6, 1977; and WHEREAS, HAROLD WINKLER served as Vice Chairman of the Indian iver County Planning and Zoning Commission from January 10, 1980 ntil September 9, 1980; and > WHEREAS, HAROLD WINKLER, served as Chairman of the Indian River. County Planning and Zoning Commission from September 9, 1980 until becember 4, 1980; and > WHEREAS, HAROLD WINKLER, first served the citizens of this County with regard to zoning matters when he was appointed to the hoard of Zoning Adjustment on February 9, 1977, in which capacity Jie served until the Board of County Commissioners decided he would be a good candidate for the Planning and Zoning Commission; and WHEREAS, HAROLD WINKLER has been instrumental in the adoption bf legislation which have made Indian Rives County a better place �n which to live, among them being: Adoption of Site Plan Approval Ordinance and the Amendment to include Minor Site Plan Approval Adoption of Landscape Ordinance Proposed rezoning of State Road 510-512 Proposed rezoning of Oslo Road > Constantly up -dating of Zoning Districts for Indian River County Adoption of Ordinance amending Southern Standard Building Code WHEREAS, HAROLD WINKLER has served the people of Indian River bounty both in his capacity as a member of the Board of Zoning Adjustment and as a member of the Indian River County Planning and Zoning Commission with great diligence and understanding_ of the heeds of the County; and WHEREAS, HAROLD WINKLER has announced his resignation from said pommission to be effective December 4, 1980; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COM- �ISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that the Board on behalf Pf itself and the citizens of Indian River County, expresses its heartfelt thanks and appreciation to HAROLD WINKLER for a job well none; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Board wishes HAROLD WINKLER continued success in his future endeavors. �iIVL� 0 This Resolution shall become effective s of the Jr A day of,� �s��' �; 1980 Adopted December 3, 1980 KI DEC 171980 4.5PacE506 No.' 80-136 WHEREAS, INDIAN RIVER COUNTY has been working toward the establishment of the NORTH INDIAN RIVER COUNTY FIRE DISTRICT; and WHEREAS, in conjunction with the organization of the NORTH INDIAN RIVER COUNTY FIRE DISTRICT, it was necessary to form the NORTH INDIAN RIVER COUNTY FIRE DISTRICT ADVISORY BOARD; and WHEREAS, from the inception of the NORTH INDIAN RIVER COUNTY FIRE STUDY COI14ITTEE, JANET D. PORTER, Secretary to Mayor Flood, the Mayor of Sebastian, has volunteered her time and services to the NORTH INDIAN FIVER COUNTY FIRE DISTRICT by taking Minutes of the meetings of both the NORTH INDIAN RIVER COUNTY FIRE STUDY COM- MITTEE and the NORTH INDIAN RIVER COUNTY FIRE DISTRICT ADVISORY BOARD; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COM- MISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that the Board on behalf of itself and the citizens of Indian River County who will benefit from the establishment of the NORTH INDIAN RIVER COUNTY FIRE DISTRICT, commends JANET D. PORTER for her devotion to the needs of the community; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Board wishes to take this opportunity to thank JANET D. PORTER for the long and arduous hours she spent taking Minutes and performing other clerical duties that were needed toward the establishment of the NORTH INDIAN RIVER COUNTY FIRE DISTRICT. This Resolution shall become effective as of the 1- t day 1980. EYE _I i No.`080-137 WHEREAS, INDIAN RIVER COUNTY has been working toward the establishment of the NORTH INDIAN RIVER COUNTY FIRE DISTRICT; and WHEREAS, in conjunction with the organization of the NORTH INDIAN RIVER COUNTY FIRE DISTRICT, it was necessary to form the NORTH INDIAN RIVER COUNTY FIRE DISTRICT ADVISORY BOARD; and WHEREAS, from the inception of the NORTH INDIAN RIVER COUNTY FIRE STUDY COMMITTEE, ELIZABETH H. REID, City of Sebastian, City Clerk, has volunteered her time and services to the NORTH INDIAN RIVER COUNTY FIRE DISTRICT by taking Minutes of the meetings of both the NORTH INDIAN RIVER COUNTY FIRE STUDY COMMITTEE and the NORTH INDIAN RIVER COUNTY FIRE DISTRICT ADVISORY BOARD; NOW, THEREFORE, BE -IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COM- MISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that the Board on behalf of itself and the citizens of Indian River County who will benefit from the establishment of the NORTH INDIAN RIVER COUNTY FIRE DISTRICT, commends ELIZABETH H. REID for her devotion to the needs of the community; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Board wishes to take this opportunity to thank ELIZABETH H. REID for the long and arduous hours she has spent taking Minutes and performing other clerical duties that were needed toward the establishment of the NORTH. INDIAN RIVER COUNTY FIRE DISTRICT. This Resolution shall become: effective: as of the ! - ' day of '� t>_�r ny..a:• 1980. IE K v v ., - - - xv- r'Abt eJU / - - - 1► ► Lwe Mm';� moo 45. PAGE:508 COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK ASKED ABOUT THE 70' EASEMENTS BY THE WABASSO BEACH PARK DEVELOPMENT PROJECT, AND ADMINISTRATOR NELSON REPORTED THAT TOMORROW THEY ARE GOING UP TO WABASSO BEACH PARK TO LOOK AT THE BOARDWALK AND THE GAZEBO, WHICH HE BELIEVED SHOULD BE SUBSTANTIALLY COMPLETED, AND THEY WILL CHECK ON THE EASEMENTS AT THAT TIME. COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK ASKED ABOUT THE PAVING OF WALKER AVENUE THROUGH THE VILLAGE GREEN PROJECT, AND ADMINISTRATOR NELSON STATED THAT THEY HAVE LOOKED AT THAT AREA AND WILL KEEP ON TOP OF THIS. COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK THEN ASKED ABOUT THE QUESTION OF REINHOLD CONSTRUCTION HAVING TO PAY SALES TAX. ADMINISTRATOR NELSON STATED THAT HE HAS AN OPINION FROM THE PURCHASING AGENT WHO HAS REVIEWED THE STATE STATUTES THAT THE COUNTY WOULD HAVE TO BUY THE MATERIAL DIRECT AND GIVE IT TO REINHOLD CONSTRUCTION; IN OTHER WORDS, THE COUNTY WOULD HAVE TO BE THEIR OWN CONTRACTOR TO REAP THAT BENEFIT. ATTORNEY COLLINS NOTED THAT WE COULD, IN OUR CHANGE ORDERS, AGREE THAT WE ARE GOING TO PURCHASE DIRECTLY. CONTRACT FOR BARRIER ISLAND -STUDY WITH REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL EXECUTED COPY OF CONTRACT FOR PROFESSIONAL CONSULTING SERVICES WITH THE TREASURE COAST RFGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL FOR THE BARRIER ISLAND STUDY IS HEREBY MADE A PART OF THE MINUTES AS APPROVED AT THE MEETING OF DECEMBER 3, 1080. 88 CONTRACT FOR PROFESSI NAL CO"SULTING SERVICES THIS AGREEMENT, entered into by and hetviean INDIAiN RIMER COUNTY, hereiriatter referred to as "COU`1TY," and TREASURE COAST REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL, hereinafter referred to as "COUNCIL;" WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the COUNTY has recently identified substantial pressures to develop the barrier island; and WHEREAS, the COUNTY recognizes that barrier islands are unique resources and often require special attention in their future planning; and WHEREAS, the COUNCIL is empowered by Chapter 160, Florida Statutes, and FAC 29K-1 to perform planning studies for local governments within the region; and WHEREAS, the COUNTY agrees to employ the COUNCIL and the COUNCIL.agrees to perform all work described in the scope of services or otherwise authorized upon the following terms and conditions: 1. SCOPE OF -SERVICES. See Exhibit "A" attached hereto and mad` a part hereof. 2. SCHEDULE OF WORK. The contract shall take effect as of the date of execution of this agreement and shall be completed no later than April 15, 198,1. In addition, progress reports and work product will be submitted to the COUNTY as follows: A. Completion of Tasks 1 through 4, as presented in the scope of services, on or before i-larc'n 1, 1961; B. Draft Final Report, on or be -Fore t4arc'n 15, 1931; C. Final Report, on or before April 15, 1951. 3. DOCUMENT AND MEETING REQUIRGirN T S. A progress report shall be submitted by the elate indicated in the previous section of this agreement. The report should consist of a summary of work coinpl ted on the project to date, and draft copies of any material prepared at this time . There shall also be an ou tl i rle of the v,or;: prog rz:.;n yet to be initiated and/or completed by 'the next submittal date. Briefings and meetings be t,rean the parties of this contract will he arranged and coordinated as v;arranted or as directed by the COU,MTY. Boox 45 ME509. DEC 171990 DEC 171990 800x 45 PACE510 The dacui<<t�nt %-)ill be st:bnitted to the C0U:1TY no later -than April 15, consisting of twenty (25) copies of the Final R+port. , 4. RFSFO`1SIBILITIES OF THE COUNTY. ide coordination, assistance, and guidance .to the The COUNTY shall prov extent deemed feasible and necessary. They shall provide all reference materials and documents in their possession which are pertinent to the study. RevieW of roports and drafts ti•rill be done in a tiF,ely manner with comments, suggestions or val s provided ded as appropriate. CcMrents :•ri 1 l be furnished on the revie+,� of appro p . the Final Draft of the report within ten (10) days of its receipt by th- COUNTY 5. CO,,11pct1SATION A'NID PAYMENT. This is a luno sunt contract for TWELVE THOUSAND FIVE HU.'NDRED DOLLARS ($12,500). This amount tai i 1 be disbursed in the following nanner: A. Upon receipt and approval of the required progress. report, on or before March 1, 1921, FIVE. THOUSAN01 DOLLARS ($5,000) ; B. Final Report on April 15, 1931, SEVcCI THOUSrVdD FIVE HUi1DRc0 DOLLARS ($7,500). Provided progress i s sati s f actory to the COUNTY, the COUNTY shall hake. na Tent normally :within t;renty (20) days of receipt and approval of the documents y and services. Final payment shall be .rithlneId pendinci �.anpletion of all documents and services required by this agreen}ent to the satisfaction of the COU�dTY, t will be ma^aged throtiigh the Indian River County Planning This projec and Zoning Cepartrent. and all trattrs should be directed to the. Depart ten% d by t`n' Director for proper disposition. Director or person designate 6. TER -MINA -1 A. Termination for Convenience - If this corrt�~act is tern Ina -ted by the COU;;TY or by t7+-itual t 1. fulfillri:t�t the' COU,.CIL agreer�}zt, at any ir.. �-ior �o shall t� paid forseri l+^}t�}'i" co;is ir}ctu~�~Cci based o;I ',11esti„ �+ c.o .h tt port i cn o tl��, -that ha i.ITY its tf,._ C r . forC 01J ',CI't sh :11 a i l to Dons 11rl`lwr tiii s CO'n t,"aC t, I T or if the COUNCIL shall violate any of the covenants, agreements, or stipulations of this contract, the COUNTY shall thereupon have the right to terminate this contract by giving written notice to the COUiCIL of such termination and specifying the effective date thereof. In that event, all items or inaterials furnished by the COUNTY and any finished or unfinished reports, notes, or field data prepared by the COUNCIL shall immediately be delivered to a place designated by the COUNTY, and the COUNCIL shall be entitled to receive just and equitable compensation for any satisfactory work or services completed. Notwithstanding the above, the COUNCIL shall not be relieved of liability to the COUNTY for damages sustained by the COUNTY by virtue of any breach of the contract by the COUNCIL, and the COUNTY may withhold any payments.to the COUNCIL for the purpose of setoff until such time as the exact alimount of damage due the COUNTY is determined. 7. RIGHT OF DECISIONS. All services performed by the COUNCIL to the reasonable satisfaction of the COUNTY or its designated representative who shall decide all questions, difficulties, and disputes of whatever,nature which may arise under or by reason of the agreement, the prosecution and fulfillment of the services hereunder and the character, quality, amount and value thereof. This section shall not preclude any party from seeking relief by an appropriate court proceeding. E. DISCLAIMER OF LIABILITY. The COUNCIL hereby agrees to indemnify, defend, save, and hold harmless the COUNTY from all claims, demands, liabilities, and suits of any nature 1.,111atsoever arising out of, or due to, any act or occurrence of omission or commission of the COUNCIL, its agents, or employees in regi•rd to the COUNCIL'S perfor. nce under this contract to the extent permitted by Florida law. 9. CONFLICT OF INTEREST. The COUNCIL covenants that it presently has no interest and shall not r,ct, t,,nich ktould conflict in any manner or acquire any interest, direct or indi DEC 171980 BOOK 45 PAGE 511 DEC 17198Q. BooK 45 NGE 512 degree with the perio•rrrance of services required to be performed under this contract. The COUNICIL further covenants that in the performance of this contract no person having any such interest shall be employed. 10. SUBLETTING. A. The COUNCIL shall not sublet, assign or transfer any a*ork under this agreement wi t'hou t the written consent of the County Planning and Zoning Director. 1,1her, applicable, and upon receipt of such consent in writing, the COUNCIL shall cause the names of the firms responsible for such portions of the work to appear on such work. B. The COUNCIL agrees to notify the COUNTY of all subcontracts no less than ten (10) days prior to the effective date of the subcontract for the purpose of approval by the COUNTY. C. The COUNCIL agrees to be responsible for the fulfillment of all work elements included in the subcontracts and agrees to be responsible for the pay,:.ent of all cronies due under any subcontract and hold the COUNTY harmless from any liabil-ities or damages arising under or from any subcontract hereunder. I 11. NOTICES. - A. Any notice or other written communication from the COUNCIL to the COUNTY shall be considered delivered when posted by Certified Plail or delivered in person to the Director of De a�tment of Indian River County, the Planning and Zoning or his designated representative. B. Any notice or other neces:.try formal cor:rrrunications from the COUNTY to the COUNCIL shall be considered delivered when posted by Certified Mail or d2liver2d in person to -the Council's Execu t -i gyre Director. 12. i'`r. ;SOi; ;cL. i NCL "'i11 s cl_rr an:l A.. To the ex tcn t rec��i i red h,� l r. ,: , 'h,- C �Ui ��. m�irrt.:irr such i;rsuranc_ ri f1 nh�+„c-t iL fr_Cr,;; cl -j p" grid r, 1'�0f'�aii^.(rS CCa??'tIS:1r101 �. .!Ilii YlLi' cl?r;iis for bo-diIy lrl l{ry, vi' i S� 'l j,cijl thC' f l;'1' f'Ur l:{;rnCC d`..il,li., �): f r'(?�;'il.�• CI;:._ - ,...I:.Ir ri. } of its services und?r this contract. B. The COUNCIL assures that the program supported by the grant will be conducted in compliance vii th Title V1 0 -If the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (P.L. 83-352), as ammended, (C2 USC 2O0d) b and the requirements imposed by the Regulations of the Department of Commerce (15 CFR Part 8) issued pursuant to that Title. In accordance therewith no person i•n the United States shall, on the ground of race, color, or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be otherwise subjected to discrimination under any program or activity for which the COUNCIL receives federal financial assistance and will immediately take any measures necessary to effectuate this agreement. C. The COUNTY and the COU,YCIL hereby agree to comply with Chapter 112, Florida Statutes, Standards of Conduct for Public Officers and Employees, when such Statute has direct application to the performance of this contract. 13. CHANGES. Either party may, from time to time, request changes in the scope of services of the COUNCIL to be performed hereunder, with concomitant adjustments in the consideration to be paid. Such changes which are r utually agreed upon by and between the COUNTY and the COUNCIL shall be incorporated in -written amendments to the agreement and shall designate the effective date of the change. 14. AGREEMENT AS INCLUDING ENTIRE AGREEMENT. This instrument embodies the whole agreerent of the parties. There are no provisions, terms, conditions, or obligations other than those contained herein; and this agreement shall supercOde all previous co;;rrurlication, rGpre- sentation or agreements, either verbal or written between, the parties h^reto. IN b1 rNESS a.1f1ERc()F, the parties h�lreto h ve f�nrLurlto set their hands and seals as of the,,state by th it sic;natr.�res. INDIA VER,COU�l Y TREASURE CC,T ?iGIO,'fir' ;ti;id CO'.1;i.rL Date: —3 — �® DEC 171990 A_tt Date - 5 - 6009 45 PAE 513 DEC 17 1980 45 PAGE 514 EXHIBIT "A" INDIAN RIVER COUNTY BARRIER ISLAIND STUDY , SCOPE OF SERVICES Purpose The intent of the study is to examine certain key constraints to future develop- ment of the barrier island in Indian River County and propose various parameters for future development that should be utilized by the County both in the prepara- tion or refinement of the Comprehensive Plan and for evaluation of whether or not specific development proposals are endorsed or rejected_ In the preparation of the study, four key constraints will be evaluated; transportation, public safety (emergency evacuation), water and sewer facilities, and natural resource- systems. The first three key constraints will be analyzed to determine the abilities of the facilities and systems to accommodate future development on the barrier island, while the fourth constraint will be examined to assist the County in the distribution of:such future development. All analysis and resulting recom- mendations will be limited to either existing conditionsjfacil'ities, or facilities that are currently committed to through a specific policy position of a public agency (i.e., 201 Plan). Also, in that the Comprehensive Plans for both Vero Beach and Indian River Shores have been completed, the future commitment to additional development in each of the plans will be viewed as a given in preparing the study. Study Program The process that will be followed in preparing the barrier island study will include the follo,,iing basic tusks: Task 1: Inventory and Analysis of Existing and Committed Development. The study will inventory the existing development pattern on the island as well as that additional devel opr, ent which has receivad approval from tine COunlly through either subdivision platting or site plan revie'-.r. This existing and committed devel op-mient will there b;� analyzed as to the present demand and impact on the key constrziilts. Task: 2: Inv;'ntory aild_p�ilialysi_i ti_? Service C�:[)�ibllltlE'.5 CF the Key Constraint-. -6- - M M The transportation, sealer and water facilities will be inventoried and analyzed to determine their current abilities to serve demands of existing and continued development on the island. Also, the 201 Plan, the proposed Comprehensive Plan including water facilities, and the plan for emergency evacuation will be taken into consideration. ' Task 3: Problem Statement. Based on the inventory and analysis examined in the first two tasks, a problem statement will be developed that will identify how much future development.on the island can. be reasonably accommodated, given the projected capacity of the current facilities. This problem statement will examine each of the first three "key constraints" to determine each facility's limitations. Also, where possible, the problem statement will identify both spatial and timing issues of each key constraint (i.e., north island vs. south island at current development trends in five years.) Task 4. Inventory and Analysis of the Isl•and's Natural Resources. The barrier island's natural resources will be inventoried to identify those areas that should be given special consideration in the assignment.of future development potential. This effort is intended to assist the County in spatially locating various intensities of future development and, where practicable, the identification of specific performance standards and other management techniques.that should be applied to insure the protection of these resources. Tas!c 5: Recommendations for Refinement of the Comprehensive Plan -and Standards for Review of Future Development Proposals. This activity will synthesize the findings of the preceding effort and provide specific recommendations to the County concerning future development of the barrier island. -7- The DEC 171980 Box ,15 FA -U515 DEC 1.7.1980 x 5 PAGE 5.1 6 recommendations will focus on two areas: 1) refinement to the study are not in conflict with and are supportive of the planning effort; and 2) special criteria that should be used in evaluating future development proposals on the barrier island. Task 6: Final Draft Report. Preparation of a final draft report to be presented to the County for their review and comment. Task 7: Final Report. Preparation and printing of the final report. - 8 - THE SEVERAL BILLS AND ACCOUNTS AGAINST THE COUNTY, HAVING BEEN AUDITED, WERE EXAMINED AND FOUND TO BE CORRECT, WERE APPROVED AND WARRANTS ISSUED IN SETTLEMENT OF SAME AS FOLLOWS: TREASURY FUND NOS, 68787 - 68926 INCLUSIVE. SUCH BILLS AND ACCOUNTS BEING ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT, THE WARRANTS SO ISSUED FROM THE RESPECTIVE BONDS BEING LISTED IN THE SUPPLEMENTAL MINUTE BOOK AS PROVIDED BY THE RULES OF THE LEGISLATIVE AUDITOR, REFERENCE TO SUCH RECORD AND LIST SO RECORDED BEING MADE A PART OF THESE MINUTES. THERE BEING NO FURTHER BUSINESS, ON MOTION MADE, SECONDED AND CARRIED, THE BOARD ADJOURNED AT 6:05 O'CLOCK P.M. ATTEST: m CLERK B00lc .5 ' PAGE e�1 DEC 17 190 97